S. CHARLES ADAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
ANN SHEPHERDSON ADAMS, APPELLEE
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.
In this family law appeal, the former husband challenges orders modifying a dissolution of marriage judgment and committing him for contempt for failure to pay child support arrearages. The court affirmed the modification order but reversed the contempt commitment for failing to include required findings regarding the payor's ability to comply.
The modification order was properly entered within the trial court's sound judicial discretion and is affirmed. The contempt commitment order is defective and reversed because it failed to include required affirmative findings regarding the appellant's ability to comply with the support order. The award of attorney's fees is affirmed, but the commitment order is reversed and remanded for the trial court to make the requisite ability findings or vacate the commitment.
[1] A trial court has discretion to modify a final judgment of dissolution of marriage.
[2] A contempt order for failure to pay child support arrearages must include an affirmative finding that the obligor presently has the ability to comply and willfully refuse…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“the entry of the order by the trial court, modifying the final judgment, was within its sound judicial discretion; therefore, the order is affirmed”
The court's affirmation of the modification order based on the trial court's discretionary authority
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA final judgment of dissolution of marriage was entered on July 10, 1973. On December 21, 1976, the trial court modified this judgment. The appellant …
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 Refusal To Comply cases and more on FLexlaw
KEHOE, Judge.
Appellant, petitioner below, and former husband of appellee, appeals an order dated December 21, 1976, entered by the trial court modifying a final judgment of dissolution of marriage entered in the cause on July 10, 1973. Appellant also appeals an order dated March 28,1977, committing him for contempt, for failure to pay appellee $4,400 in arrearages for child support, and awarding appellee attorney’s fees.
After hearing oral argument, reviewing the record, and considering the briefs of the parties on appeal, we are convinced that the entry of the order by the trial court, modifying the final judgment, was within its sound judicial discretion; therefore, the order is affirmed.
However, the commitment order is defective. The order fails to comply with the requirement that such an order include an affirmative finding that either the former husband presently had the ability to comply with the order, and willfully refused to do so, or that he previously had the ability to comply, but divested himself of that ability to frustrate the intent and purpose of the order. See Faircloth v. Faircloth, 339 So. 2d 650 (Fla.1976), and Epstein v. Epstein, 354 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Further, appellant has failed to demonstrate any reversible error in the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees to appel-lee at the contempt proceedings; accordingly, that portion of the order is affirmed.
The order of commitment is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to make the required affirmative finding of ability, if supported by the record, or, otherwise, to vacate the commitment order. Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Murphy v. Murphy, 370 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…d it arise, purge himself of contempt by complying with the provisions of this Order.” Appellant-husband’s points directed to this order urge first that the order is defective under the requirements for such an order as set forth in Adams v. Adams, 357 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). In that case, the court stated in reviewing a similar order: “However, the commitment order is defective. The order fails to comply with the requirement that such an order include an affirmative finding that either the former hu…
-
Adams v. Adams, 423 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…rected, after remand, to amend the order under review by entering judgment8 [*599] against Mr. Adams in the additional sum of $10,615.92, for a total of $17,122.14. Remanded with directions. . In two other appearances of this case, Adams v. Adams, 357 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), and Adams v. Adams, 368 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), we approved an upward modification of the support provisions and considered orders holding the husband in contempt for failing to make the payments required. . The basis of…
-
Hammond v. Sandstrom, 376 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…ully refuses to do so, the imprisonment for contempt may not be sustained.1 Faircloth v. Faircloth, supra; State ex rel. Trezevant v. McLeod, 126 Fla. 229, 170 So. 735 (1936); Murphy v. Murphy, 370 So. 2d 403, 409 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Adams v. Adams, 357 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). (2) While the order of contempt provided that Hammond could purge himself by making his child-support payments,2 the order of commitment did not. It is well-settled that “It is necessary that an order imprisoning for civil cont…
Previewing 3 of 6 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)
- Vandergrift v. Fort Pierce Mem'l Hosp., Inc., 354 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)