JOSEPH T. GARO, PETITIONER,
v.
AGNES MAE GARO, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida Supreme Court held that a contempt order for nonpayment of alimony is invalid without specific findings that the obligor presently has the ability to pay or previously divested himself of that ability through fault or neglect.
A trial court must make an affirmative finding that the obligor either presently has the ability to comply with an alimony order and willfully refuses, or previously had the ability but divested himself of it through fault or neglect designed to frustrate the order's purpose.
[1] A contempt order for nonpayment of alimony requires specific findings that the obligor presently has the ability to comply and willfully refuses, or previously had the ab…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We hold a trial judge must make an affirmative finding that either (1) the petitioner presently has the ability to comply with the order and willfully refuses to do so, or (2) that the petitioner previously had the ability to comply, but divested himself of that ability through his fault or neglect designed to frustrate the intent and purpose of the order.”
Statement of the required legal standard for contempt orders in alimony cases.
Joseph Garo was held in contempt for nonpayment of alimony. The trial court found him in willful default but made no specific finding regarding his pr…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Willful Default cases and more on FLexlaw
HATCHETT, Justice.
By petition for writ of certiorari, we have for review a decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal reported at 327 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), which conflicts with Ratner v. Ratner, 297 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), and State ex rel. Trezevant v. McLeod, 126 Fla. 229, 170 So. 735 (1936), thereby vesting jurisdiction in this court pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution.
This case involves the validity of an order holding petitioner in contempt for nonpayment of alimony. The trial court made no specific finding that petitioner was presently able to pay any amounts due, but found him to be in willful default. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed. Petitioner contends that the order of contempt is fatally defective in that it lacks specific findings as to his present ability to pay. We agree and have so held in Faircloth v. Faircloth, 339 So. 2d 650 (Fla.1976):
We hold a trial judge must make an affirmative finding that either (1) the petitioner presently has the ability to comply with the order and willfully refuses to do so, or (2) that the petitioner previously had the ability to comply, but divested himself of that ability through his fault or neglect designed to frustrate the intent and purpose of the order. Accordingly, the decision of the District Court is quashed and the cause remanded to the trial court with directions to make the required findings, if supported by the record, or otherwise vacate the order of contempt.
It is so ordered.
OVERTON, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG and KARL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Eugenia Bowen & the Fla. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 1985)…nt ability to pay the arrearage and that, under the facts of this case, the respondent was improperly incarcerated for civil contempt. We recognize the need to explain our decisions in Faircloth v. Faircloth, 339 So. 2d 650 (Fla.1976); Garo v. Garo, 347 So. 2d 418 (Fla.1977); Pugliese v. Pugliese, 347 So. 2d 422 (Fla.1977); Lamm v. Chapman, 413 So. 2d 749 (Fla.1982); and Andrews v. Walton, [*1276] 428 So. 2d 663 (Fla.1983), and harmonize them with multiple district court decisions on this issue. In this opini…
-
Gregory v. Rice, 727 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 1999)…rule, we stated: We have noted on numerous occasions that there are two distinct type of contempt proceedings: (1) criminal contempt proceedings, and (2) civil contempt proceedings. Bowen v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274 (Fla.1985); Pugliese v. Pugliese, 347 So. 2d 418[422] (Fla.1977). Criminal contempt is used to punish intentional violations of court orders or to vindicate the authority of the court, and “potential criminal contemnors are entitled to the same constitutional due process protections afforded crim…
-
Safie v. Safie, 416 So. 2d 485 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…at the determined arrearages are not fully paid within seven days is reversed because the order does not contain the requisite finding that the husband willfully failed to make such payments despite his then-present ability to do so.1 Garo v. Garo, 347 So. 2d 418 (Fla.1977); Faircloth v. Faircloth, 339 So. 2d 650 (Fla.1976); DuBois v. DuBois, 412 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Halpern v. Halpern, 384 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Blum v. Blum, 382 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Failla v. Fallia, 379 So. 2d 13…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Faircloth v. Faircloth, 339 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 1976)
- State v. McLeod, 126 Fla. 229 (Fla. 1936)
- Alston v. State, 297 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- Garo v. Garo, 327 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)