Upper Augusta Township v. BMMA, LLC

Summary

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania held that a trial court improperly sentenced BMMA, LLC’s principal to 60 days’ incarceration for civil contempt without specifying a condition allowing him to purge the contempt. The court explained that a civil contempt order must state what the contemnor must do to obtain release, while a criminal contempt proceeding requires additional procedural safeguards. The court reversed the portion of the trial court’s order imposing the incarceration sentence.

Holdings

1. Before a contemnor may be incarcerated for civil contempt, the order must clearly state the condition that will permit the contemnor to purge the contempt and obtain release. The trial court's unconditional 60-day incarceration order was invalid because it contained no such condition.
2. The November 4, 2021 order could not be sustained as an order of indirect criminal contempt because Gilligbauer was not afforded the procedural safeguards required in a criminal contempt proceeding, including adequate notice and an opportunity to prepare and present a defense.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court erred or abused its discretion by sentencing Gilligbauer to incarceration for civil contempt without specifying a condition that would permit him to purge the contempt.
2. Whether, if the order was intended as criminal contempt, the trial court violated the required procedural safeguards for indirect criminal contempt, including notice and an opportunity to prepare and present a defense.

Disposition

reversed