Bowen v. Bowen

471 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 1985) · Supreme Court of Florida · June 20, 1985 · No. No. 64906

Summary

The Supreme Court of Florida addresses the distinction between civil and criminal contempt in proceedings to enforce child-support obligations. It holds that incarceration for civil contempt requires a separate affirmative finding that the contemnor has the present ability to pay the purge amount, while criminal contempt requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt and appropriate due-process protections. The court approves the district court's decision and remands for further proceedings.

Holdings

  1. Incarceration for civil contempt cannot be imposed unless the trial court makes a separate affirmative finding that the contemnor presently possesses the ability to comply with the purge conditions.
  2. A prior judgment establishing the amount of child support or alimony creates a presumption that the defaulting party has the ability to pay; after the movant proves the order and nonpayment, the defaulting party must produce evidence that intervening circumstances beyond the party's control eliminated that ability.
  3. When punishment is sought for continual and willful failure to pay support or for affirmative asset divestment, a criminal contempt proceeding should be instituted, and the movant must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant willfully violated the support order.
  4. The record did not establish that Frankie Bowen had the present ability to pay the purge amount; therefore, the incarceration order for civil contempt was improper.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a court may incarcerate a civil contemnor for failure to pay child support without making a separate affirmative finding that the contemnor presently has the ability to pay the purge amount.
  2. Whether a finding that a support obligor previously had the ability to comply but wrongfully divested himself of that ability permits incarceration for civil contempt without a present ability to purge.
  3. What procedures and burdens govern civil and criminal contempt proceedings used to enforce child-support or alimony obligations.

Disposition

approved

Cases Cited (16)

  • Bowen v. Bowen, 454 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)(approved)
  • Waskin v. Waskin, 452 So. 2d 999 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)(conflicted_with)
  • Faircloth v. Faircloth, 339 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 1976)(limited)
  • Garo v. Garo, 347 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1977)(followed)
  • Pugliese v. Pugliese, 347 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1977)(followed)
  • Lamm v. Chapman, 413 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 1982)(followed)
  • Andrews v. Walton, 428 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 1983)(followed)
  • Demetree v. State ex rel. Marsh, 89 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1956)(followed)
  • In re S.L.T., 180 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)(followed)
  • Aaron v. State, 284 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 1973)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 16.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Download CaseDownload Case DataDownload Case and DataDownload AI Instructions

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Florida Supreme Court