Make your own free website on Tripod.com

MCRORY VS MCRORY

5 - 31 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY OF NON PAYMENT OF $500.00

Home
MAIL BOX FOR MCRORY VS MCRORY
FROM CAROLINE TO DADDY
FROM DADDY TO CAROLINE
CHRON FILE OF MCRORY VS MCRORY
HITS FOR THIS SITE MCRORY VS MCRORY
_________
__________
SUMMARY OF ALL VIOLATIONS AND RESTRAINING ORDER BY JIM MCRORY
__________
THE CYCLE OF VIOLENCE - HOTLINE 1 800 799 - 7233
___________
_________
11 - 22 - 2002 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY OF CAROL E. MCRORY'S SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
11 - 22 - 2002 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY OF PROFIT & LOSS STATEMENT OF VANDERMEER DESIGN
12 - 13 - 2003 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY OF SEPARATION DATE
1 - 2 - 2004 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY FOR TAKING CHILDREN WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE OF SPOUSE
1 - 7 - 2004 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY OF ACCOUNTING DOCUMENTS BY CAROL E. MCRORY
1 - 16 - 2004 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY OF RESTRAINING ORDER SERVED TO CAROL E. MCRORY
2 - 1 - 2005 VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY THE DATE OF CHILDS ADDRESS
3 - 7 - 07 - VIOLATION BY JIM MCRORY - FOR PAYING HIS AT&T BILL WITH MY MONEY
10 - 1 - 2007 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY FOR INSTALLMENT PAYMENTS & DEBTS
10 - 31 - 2007 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - OSC - FAMILY LAW FOR NON PAYMENT OF MARITIAL SETTLEMENT
__________
_________
OSC WON 10 - 31- 2007 - NO PAST MORE VIOLATIONS WILL BE EXCEPTED
_________
_________
4-20-2008 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - ENGAGEMENT OF JIM MCRORY TO FAITH RUSCA-FORD
5 - 22 - 2008 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL CHARLES CLINE JIM MCRORY'S ATTORNEY
5 - 22 - 2008 NOTICE OF DIVORCE SETTLEMENT OF $500.00 PER MONTH FOR 1 YEAR
5 - 22 - 2008 NOTICE OF RETIREMENT PAYMENTS FOR CAROLINE E. MCRORY - KENNEDY
11 - 11 - 2008 VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY FAITH RUSCA FORD REGRADING THANKSGIVING
12 - 25 - 2008 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY REGARDING CHRISTMAS DAY
12 - 27 - 2008 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS CHEMICAL FIRE STARTED BY MICHAL RUSCA - FORD
1 - 1- 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY FAITH RUSCA - FORD REGARDING NEW YEARS DAY
2 - 12 - 2009 VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY MICHAEL RUSCA - FORD REGARDING AVA MCRORY & DOCTOR VISIT
3 - 12 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY REGARDING LETTER ABOUT BACK ALIMONY
3 - 15 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY FAITH RUSCA - FORD REGARDING THREAT OF ALIMONY
3 - 28 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY REGARDING REDUCTION OF MONTHLY ALIMONY 15TH & 31ST
3 - 31 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY OF NON PAYMENT OF $500.00
4 - 1 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY REGARDING DIVORCE SETTLEMENT PAYMENTS OF $500
4 - 12 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY REGARDING VISITATION ON EASTER DAY
4 - 16 - 2009 GAVE CLAYTON MCRORY COPIES OF THE FOLLOWING VIOLATIONS OF RIGHTS
4 - 20 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY & FAITH RUSCA - FORD REGARDING VISITATION
4 - 20 - 2009 - CALLED ALAMEDA POLICE DEPT FOR ENFORCING RIGHTS OF VISITATION
4 - 22 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY FOR FILING RESTRAINING ORDER
4 - 22 - 2009 - CALLED ALAMEDA POLICE DEPT TO ENFORCE VISITATION RIGHTS
4 - 22 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY REGARDING VISITATION
4 - 22 - 2009 - CALLED ESURANCE TO GET INFORMATION FOR REMOVAL OF JIM MCRORY ON TRUCK
4 - 23 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY FOR BEING GRANTED COURT ORDER
4 - 24 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY REGARDING THE RETURN OF TRUCK
4 - 27 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF BEING SERVED BY JIM MCRORY AND NOT HOME
4 - 30 - 2009 VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY OF CAROLINE E. KENNEDY'S WEBSITE
4 - 30 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY OF NON PAYMENT OF $500.00
5 - 1 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY REGARDING RESTRAINING ORDER
5 - 7 - 2009 VIOLATION OF OFFICERS NAME BY JIM MCRORY
5 - 10 - 2009 VIOLATION OF RIGHTS FOR VISITATION ON MOTHER'S DAY BY JIM MCRORY
5 - 31 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY OF NON PAYMENT OF $1,500.00
5 - 31 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY FOR NON RETURNING OF TRUCK
5 - 31 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY OF NON PAYMENT OF $500.00
6 - 10 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY CALLED THE POLICE RE: RESTAINING ORDER
6 - 20 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS BY JIM MCRORY & FAITH RUSCA - FORD REGRADING MARRIAGE DATE
6 - 30 - 2009 - VIOLATION BY JIM MCRORY OF NON-PAYMENT OF $500.00
6 - 30 - 2009 - VIOLATION BY JIM MCRORY OF NOT RETURNING TRUCK
7 - 9 - 2009 VIOLATION BY JIM MCRORY REGARDING ANSWERING MACHINE
7 - 19 - 2009 VIOLATION BY JIM MCRORY RE: PAST DUE BILLS
7 - 31 - 2009 - VIOLATION BY JIM MCRORY OF NON-PAYMENT OF $500.00
7 - 31 - 2009 - VIOLATION BY JIM MCRORY FOR NOT RETURNING THE TRUCK
8 - 30 - 2009 - VIOLATION BY JIM MCRORY OF NON-PAYMENT OF $453.00
8 - 30 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY FOR NON RETURNING OF TRUCK
9 - 29 - 2009 - VIOLATION OF RIGHTS - BY JIM MCRORY FOR NON RETURNING OF TRUCK
_________
_________
FORMS & JUDGEMENTS - MCRORY VS MCRORY
__________
________
POWER OF ATTORNEY OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY
JUN 21, 2007 - 3 DAY PAY OR QUIT NOTICE - FORM LETTER
FEB 4, 2005 JUDGEMENT & DECREE CHANGING NAME - CAROLINE E. MCRORY TO CAROLINE E. KENNEDY
DEC 4, 2007 - APPREARANCE STIPULATIONS WAIVERS
DEC 4, 2007 - STIPULATION & WAIVER OF FINAL DECLARATION OF DISCLOSURE
DEC 4, 2007 - DECLARATION FOR DEFUALT OR UNCONSTED DISSOLUTION OR LEGAL SEPARATION
DEC 4, 2007 - JUDGEMENT OF DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
DEC 4, 2007 - STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGEMENT
DEC 4, 2007 - NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGEMENT
DEC 4, 2007 - JUDGEMENT (FAMILY LAW)
DEC 4, 2007 - JUDGEMENT (OSC FAMILY LAW) MCRORY VS MCRORY
MAY 22, 2008 - MARITIAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT OF $1,500.00 + $500.00 FOR 12 MONTHS + $453.00
MAY 1, 2009 - RESTRAINING ORDER RECEIVED
MAY 13, 2009 - RESTRAINING ORDER AFTER HEARING - DV-130
MAY 13, 2009 - COURT TRANSCRIPT OF RESTRAINING ORDER
JUN 4, 2009 - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND AFFIDAVIT FOR CONTEMPT FORM
JUN 5, 2009 - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND AFFIDAVIT FOR CONTEMPT - STAMPED
JUN 23, 2009 - LETTER TO DOUGAL C. MACDONALD & JULIE ROSSI, ESQ
JUN 23, 2009 - DECLARATION REGARDING NOTICE FOR EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER
JUN 23, 2009 - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE PACKET NO. 11
JUN 24, 2009 - LETTER TO DOUGAL C. MACDONALD, ESQ ABOUT JULIE ROSSI, ESQ
00 - 00 - 0000 - JUDGEMENT OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE PACKET NO. 11
AUG 26, 2009 - JUDGEMENT OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND AFFIDAVIT FOR CONTEMPT
AUG 26, 2009 - TRANSCRIPT OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND AFFIDAVIT FOR CONTEMPT
SEP 29. 2009 - SENCENTING OF JIM MCRORY - ALAMEDA SUPERIOR COURT - 9 - 29- 2009 - ROOM 1A 9:00 AM
EVIDENCE OF NON PAYMENT - RETURN OF TRUCK - INSURANCE CARD - AVA MCRORY - DRAWINGS BY JIM MCRORY
THE LIST OF STALKERS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY NEE KENNEDY
_________
__________
MAY 24, 2009 WHAT I WOULD LIKE DONE TO MY HIPPIE COWBOY EX HUSBAND JIM MCRORY
_________
__________
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY - SPOUSAL SUPPORT OF $1,500.00 MONTHLY
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY - ALIMONY PAYMENTS TO CONTINUE PAST 2012
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY - OSC FAMILY LAW DEGREE
SOLE CUSTODY OF CHILDREN OF MARRIAGE OF MCRORY - CLAYTON & AVA MCRORY
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY - DRAWINGS & COPYRIGHT - NOV 1999
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY - $1,500.00 + $500.00 FOR 12 MONTHS + $453.00
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY - ALL FURNISHINGS OF JIM MCRORY
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY - TRUCK
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY-CHECKING & SAVING ACCTS OF JIM MCRORY & CHILDREN
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY - FIRST PEN INSURANCE - SAVINGS ACCT
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY - SAVINGS BOND OF JIM MCRORY
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY - PERS BENEFITS - MEDICAL INSURANCE
___________
__________
PAST LAW SUITS OF CAROLINE E. MCRORY (NEE) KENNEDY
___________
__________
AUG 30, 1992 - COMPLAINT LETTER - LYNDIA GUTHERIE - DUNSMUIR HOUSE & GARDENS
AUG 30, 1992 - COMPLAINT LETTER - BEV HUNT - DUNSMUIR HOUSE & GARDENS
JUN 20, 2003 - RESTRAINING ORDER - NINA ALVES
__________
_________
TO ATTORNEYS OF CAROLINE E. KENNEDY FOR FUTURE LAW SUITS
_________
_________
AUG 30, 1997 - VIOLATIONS OF TRESA WILKINS OF DUNSMUIR HOUSE & GARDENS
JUL 16, 1999 - EVIDENCE OF VIOLATIONS BY CAROLYN BESSETTE KENNEDY RE: JFK,JR PLANE CRASH
MORE EVIDENCE OF VIOLATIONS BY CAROLYN BESSETTE KENNEDY RE: JFK,JR PLANE CRASH
AUG 30, 2008 - EVIDENCE OF VIOLATIONS FOR ANN MESSINA BESSETTE FREEMAN
AUG 30, 2008 - EVIDENCE OF VIOLATIONS FOR WILLIAM BESSETTE
AUG 30, 2008 - EVIDENCE OF VIOLATIONS FOR DR RICHARD FREEMAN
MAR 12, 2009 - VIOLATIONS OF PETE SUTHERLAND OF USS HORNET DOCENT TRAINER
JUN 27, 2009 - VIOLATION BY PETE SUTERLAND ON USS HORNET
_________
_________
MAR 15, 2009 - WHAT I WANT DONE TO FAITH & MICHAL RUSCA FORD
1ST VIOLATION OF FAITH & MICHAL RUSCA FORD
2ND VIOLATION OF FAITH & MICHAL RUSCA FORD
3RD VIOLATION OF FAITH &MICHAL RUSCA FORD
4TH VIOLATION OF FAITH & MICHAL RUSCA FORD

computer VIEWING of one world order viewers

computer VIEWING of one world order viewers

 

YTJTFCJN

Contempt - General Concepts

A party subject to a valid court order who, with knowledge of the order and the ability to comply, fails to comply with the terms of the order is subject to a contempt adjudication and statutory contempt penalties (Ca Civ Pro 1218 & 1219). As an enforcement remedy, exercise of the contempt power enables the court to compel compliance with its valid orders.

In a "civil contempt," the punishment is "remedial, and for the benefit of the complainant." In a "criminal contempt," the sentence is "punitive, to vindicate the authority of the court."

The face of the Judicial Council Affidavit for Contempt form expressly states "A contempt proceeding is criminal in nature" and advises the citee that "the possible penalties include jail sentence . . ." Consequently, at least one court concludes any contempt proceeding brought on the standard Judicial Council contempt form is per se a criminal (not a civil or "remedial") contempt matter.

Family law orders and judgments are enforceable by contempt unless punishment by contempt would violate the constitutional guaranty against imprisonment for nonpayment of "debt" (U.S. Const., Amend. XIII; Ca Const. Art. I, 10). However, an order or judgment is not a "debt" within the meaning of the constitutional guaranty against imprisonment for "debt" simply because it requires the payment of money. As developed below, most (but not all) family law orders and judgments are deemed based on a law-imposed obligation (not "money judgments in civil actions for debts") and thus are enforceable by the court's contempt power

Orders Enforceable By Contempt

Support Orders: Child, spousal and family support orders are based on an obligation arising out of marriage and parentage and are imposed by law. They are not money judgments in civil actions for the payment of a "debt" within the meaning of the constitutional guaranty against imprisonment for debt and thus clearly are enforceable by contempt.

Child Custody & Visitation Orders: Child custody and visitation orders do not impose a "debt" obligation. Thus, e.g., the court may invoke its contempt power against a parent who unjustifiably interferes with the other parent's court-ordered visitation rights or violates an injunction restraining relocation with the children.

Attorney Fees/Costs Orders: Need-based attorney fees and costs are awardable by statute in marital proceedings (Ca Fam 2030/2032). The award is based on a law-imposed obligation (not arising out of a money judgment for a "debt") and thus is enforceable by contempt.

Property Division Orders: A spouse who refuses to relinquish a specific item of property or to pay over a portion of a specific fund of money pursuant to a community property division order is subject to enforcement by contempt. The obligation is "law-imposed" (not a "debt") because based on the parties' statutory right to an equal division of community property upon termination of marital status (Ca Fam 2550 et seq.).

Restraining Orders & Family Court Protective Orders: The court may properly invoke its contempt power to compel compliance with valid protective orders and restraining orders issued in a domestic relations proceeding. [Ca Penal 273.6 (misdemeanor penalty for intentional and knowing violation of Ca Fam 6218 protective orders)]

Failure To Comply With "Declaration Of Disclosure" Requirements: A spouse who has complied with the statutory "declaration of disclosure" requirements in marriage dissolution proceedings (Ca Fam 2100 et seq.) has various statutory remedies against the other spouse who has failed to comply. One such remedy is a motion to compel a further response (Ca Fam 2107(b)(1)). If the noncomplying spouse fails to file a sufficient response, the complying spouse may seek monetary sanctions "in addition to any other remedy provided by law" (Ca Fam 2107(c))--including an OSC re Contempt]

Orders Enforceable By Contempt

Marital Settlement Agreement Obligations Not Merged Into Judgment: Obligations arising out of a marital settlement agreement are not enforceable as court orders unless "merged" or incorporated in the judgment. Consequently, breach of a marital settlement agreement (or any other contract) is not remediable by contempt where the defaulted obligation was never made a part of the judgment.

Marital Debt Liability Orders: An order pursuant to a division of the community estate requiring a spouse to make specified payments in satisfaction of a community liability is a "debt" not enforceable by contempt . . . unless the obligation is an integral part of a support order.

Statute Of Limitations

The contempt remedy for noncompliance with a court order made under the Family Code is subject to a statute of limitations (Ca Civ Pro 1218.5)

Support Orders: For an alleged failure to pay child, family or spousal support, the contempt action must be commenced no later than three years from the date the payment was due. [Ca Civ Pro 1218.5(b)

A contempt cause of action for nonpayment of support may be broken down into separate "counts" for each month payment was not made in full. Thus, the fact the obligor stopped (or fell short in) payments over three years ago is not fatal to a contempt remedy: Each month within the three-year period for which payments were in default is separately punishable as separate counts of contempt. [See Ca Civ Pro 1218.5(a)]

Other Family Court Orders: A contempt action to enforce any other order made under the Family Code must be brought within two years "from the time that the alleged contempt occurred." [Ca Civ Pro 1218.5(b)]

Due Process Protections

If the contempt proceedings are criminal in nature, the U.S. Constitution guarantees the citee the full panoply of due process safeguards afforded criminal defendants.

Notice Of The Charge: The citee must be formally notified of the charge and of the time and place for the court hearing on the charge. Service of the notice must be effected in a manner authorized for service of summons; an OSC re Contempt is not properly served by the more liberal Ca Civ Pro 1010 et seq. methods for service of motions or OSCs generally.[Ca Civ Pro 1016; Ca Fam 215]

Opportunity To Be Heard: Unlike ordinary motion and OSC proceedings, contempt cannot be decided on the moving and responding papers alone. The citee is entitled to a formal hearing as a matter of right and must be allowed to testify, to call and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence in defense of the charge. [Ca Civ Pro 1217]

Right To Counsel: Contempt citees clearly have a due process right to be represented by an attorney they have retained for that purpose. Additionally, where the potential penalty includes a jail sentence, an indigent citee has the due process right to court-appointed counsel at county expense.

Application Of The 5th Amendment: The citee must be afforded the testimonial privileges of a criminally accused: He or she is entitled to exercise the privilege not to be called as a witness, and can decline to answer specific questions, claiming the privilege against self-incrimination. These privileges are not waived by filing an answer to the charging declaration.

Criminal Burden Of Proof: As a general rule, the citee also has the same rights as a criminally accused to proof of a prima facie contempt case by competent evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. The contempt must be discharged if the charging party fails to carry this burden on each element of the prima facie case.

Right To Jury Trial: The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to a jury trial for all "serious" criminal contempts--i.e., when the contempt is punishable by more than six months' imprisonment.

The right to a jury trial under the California constitution is broader: It extends to all criminal prosecutions above an "infraction." Thus, there is a right to jury trial in criminal contempt proceedings that carry a maximum penalty comparable to a felony or misdemeanor (six months' imprisonment plus $1,000 fine) regardless of what the Legislature has labeled the offense.

However, there is no right to jury trial where the court invokes its general summary contempt power under Ca Civ Pro 1209 and imposes only a maximum five-day sentence and/or $1,000 fine (Ca Civ Pro 1218(a)). That punishment is not akin to a misdemeanor penalty and thus does not trigger the state constitutional jury trial provision.

If the court proceeds to trial on contempt charges without a jury, and the citee has not expressly waived the right to a jury, the maximum sentence that may be imposed is 180 days (six months). A longer sentence in violation of the jury trial right will not invalidate the contempt conviction or require retrial by jury; but the court must reduce the sentence to six months or less.

Double Jeopardy: Constitutional "double jeopardy" protection guarantees that a person will not be subject to duplicate punishment or duplicate prosecution for the same criminal offense (U.S. Const., 5th Amend; see also Ca Penal 1387). Double jeopardy protection fully attaches in a nonsummary criminal contempt prosecution to the same extent as it does in other prosecutions for a criminal offense.

Initiating Contempt Proceedings

Contempt proceedings to enforce a civil judgment or order are commenced by presenting a prescribed "charging affidavit" to the court. [Ca Civ Pro 1211(a)] Based on the affidavit (which recites the facts constituting the prima facie contempt), the court must then issue and sign an order to show cause directing the alleged contemnor to appear and be heard on the charge at a specified date and time. [Ca Civ Pro 1212]

In family law cases, the contempt proceedings must be initiated by filing and serving an FL-410 Order to Show Cause and Affidavit for Contempt, along with an applicable Affidavit of Facts Constituting Contempt (FL-411 or FL-412). These forms have been adopted for mandatory use.

The facts constituting the contempt must be alleged by an "affidavit of facts," setting forth the type of order violated, the date the order was issued, how the order was violated, and when the violation occurred. Jurisdiction to adjudicate a contempt ordinarily exists only if the charging affidavit alleges evidentiary facts showing a prima facie case of contempt (as developed below). [Ca Civ Pro 1211(a)] However, a deficient charging affidavit may be amended at any stage of the proceeding (Ca Civ Pro 1211.5(b)). And, if there is no objection to the sufficiency of the charging affidavit, jurisdiction to adjudicate contempt may be established by facts proved at the contempt hearing (in which case, the court "shall cause the affidavit or statement to be amended to conform to proof"). [Ca Civ Pro 1211.5(a)]

Elements Of A Cause Of Action For Contempt:

The facts generally necessary to establish a prima facie contempt of a family law order are: (i) rendition of a valid order; (ii) the citee's knowledge of the order; and (iii) the citee's willful disobedience of the order.

Valid Order: A contempt adjudication cannot stand if the underlying order is invalid. The charging affidavit must identify the underlying order by date of entry and type. For purposes of sustaining a prima facie case, the court can presume validity unless the order is void on its face; the citee thus normally bears the burden of showing invalidity, either as an affirmative defense in the answer or by motion to discharge the contempt citation.

Knowledge Of The Order: The charging affidavit must set forth facts showing the citee's notice or knowledge of the underlying order (a jurisdictional prerequisite to a valid contempt adjudication).

Knowledge can be shown by personal service of a copy of the order, the citee's presence in court when the order was made, the citee's signature on a stipulation upon which the order was based, or proof that the citee previously sought relief related to the order (e.g., modification).

Order Willfully Disobeyed: To complete a prima facie case of contempt, the charging party must allege facts showing the citee's willful disobedience of the underlying order.

Support Cases: In making a family law support or attorney fees/costs order, the family court necessarily must determine the obligor's ability to pay (Ca Fam 4320(c) (spousal support), 4053(c),(d) (child support), 270, 271(a), 2030(a) (attorney fees and costs)). Since the court has already determined the obligor/citee's ability to pay the underlying order, present ability to pay is not an element of a prima facie contempt case predicated on nonpayment. Rather, inability to pay is an affirmative defense that must be proved by the citee.

Custody/Visitation Cases: A custodial parent can be held in contempt of a visitation order only when he or she has sufficient control over the child so as to have the ability to make the child available for visitation. This is a fact question in each case. A parent probably has sufficient control over minor children of "tender years" to compel them to visit with the other parent; failure to make such children available for visitation probably would be punishable as contempt. But the result may be otherwise when the children get older and it becomes more difficult to exert parental "control." If a teenage child refuses to visit with the noncustodial parent, through no fault of the custodial parent, the custodial parent lacks the ability to comply with the order and cannot be held in contempt; in these cases, the noncustodial parent is probably left without a remedy.

Filing And Service

Filing With Court Clerk: The completed OSC and affidavit form(s) are taken to the court clerk, who will obtain the judge's signature on the OSC and then file the papers.

Personal Service Required: Conformed copies of the charging affidavit and OSC must be served on the citee at least 21 calendar days before the hearing (Ca Civ Pro 1005(b)). The citee must be served personally, in a manner authorized for service of summons. Service on the citee's attorney will not suffice in a contempt proceeding. [Ca Civ Pro 1015, 1016; see also Ca Fam 215 (postjudgment proceedings)]

Exception Were Citee Conceals Him/Herself: "Substitute service" on the citee's attorney of record might suffice where the citee has concealed himself or herself to avoid service of the contempt papers. [Shibley v. Super.Ct. (1927) 202 Cal. 738, 742-743, 262 P 332, 334; see also Cedars-Sinai Imaging Med. Group v. Super.Ct. (Moore), supra, 83 Cal.App.4th at 1286, 100 Cal.Rptr.2d at 324--personal service on citee required "(u)nless the citee has concealed himself from the court"] However, a charging party seeking to invoke this exception to personal service must provide the court with evidentiary facts showing reasonable efforts to ascertain the citee's whereabouts and the efforts taken to attempt service on the citee.

Responding To The Charge

The citee may answer the charge, admitting or denying it, or may move for a discharge without answering.

In response to the contempt charge, and before the hearing, the citee can file an opposing affidavit (declaration under penalty of perjury; Ca Civ Pro 2015.5), questioning the adequacy of the moving party's charging affidavit or raising a sufficient "excuse or justification" in defense. The opposing affidavit together with the charging affidavit frame the issues to be tried in the proceeding.

Common Defenses: Contempt charges are commonly defended on the ground that any failure to comply with the underlying order was not "wilful" because the citee lacked the ability to comply. The citee does not meet this burden, however, with conclusory declarations. He or she must set forth evidentiary facts showing why complete performance was impossible. Moreover, default under the order will not be excused if the responding allegations disclose that the inability to comply was self-imposed for the purpose of avoiding compliance.

Note also that disobedience of a lawful court order is not excused by the fact the citee was acting on advice of counsel. Moreover, attorneys who encourage such defiance can be held in contempt themselves for their own recalcitrant conduct.

Motion For Discharge: In lieu of an answer, the citee can move for a discharge of the contempt citation on the following grounds:

    • The charging affidavit does not make out a prima facie case of contempt.
    • The order expired before the alleged violation. (But if the order was in effect at the time of the violation, discharge will not be granted simply because it has expired or been superseded at the time of the contempt proceedings)
    • The same charge was previously made on the same facts and the citee was discharged on the merits.

The Hearing

Appearance At The Hearing: Normally, either the citee or his or her attorney must appear at the hearing; and, if neither appears, a bench warrant can issue to secure their presence. But it is error for the court to proceed in the absence of the alleged contemnor or his or her attorney, unless it finds the OSC and Affidavit for Contempt forms were validly served and the failure to appear was voluntary. [Ca Civ Pro 1217]

Admissable Evidence: The charging and opposing affidavits are hearsay and thus inadmissible over objection. [Ca Evid 1200(a),(b)]

Contempt Penalties

The penalties upon a contempt adjudication are prescribed by Ca Civ Pro 1218 and 1219.

Mandatory Community Service Or Imprisonment: Upon a contempt adjudication for failure to comply with a court order made under the Family Code, the court "shall order" community service and/or imprisonment as prescribed by Ca Civ Pro 1218(c).

First Contempt: Upon a first finding of contempt, the contemnor must be ordered to perform community service of up to 120 hours, or to be imprisoned up to 120 hours (five days), for each count of contempt. [Ca Civ Pro 1218(c)(1)]

Second Contempt: Upon a second finding of contempt, the contemnor must be ordered to perform up to 120 hours of community service, in addition to imprisonment of up to 120 hours (five days), for each count of contempt. [Ca Civ Pro 1218(c)(2)]

Third Contempt: Upon the third or any subsequent finding of contempt, the contemnor must be imprisoned for up to 240 hours (10 days) and be ordered to perform up to 240 hours of community service, for each count of contempt. [Ca Civ Pro 1218(c)(3)(A)]

The contemnor must also be ordered to pay an "administrative fee," not exceeding the "actual cost" of the contemnor's administration and supervision, while assigned to a community service program. [Ca Civ Pro 1218(c)(3)(B)]

Calculating "Counts" Of Contempt In Support Nonpayment Cases: With regard to child, family or spousal support contempts, each month in which there was a default may be alleged as a separate count of contempt and punishment imposed for each count proved. [Ca Civ Pro 1218.5(a)]

Read together with 1218(c), above, this provision means that each count alleged in one charging affidavit may result in one "finding of contempt"; but that the specified community service and imprisonment penalties may be aggregated for each of the counts proved.

Example: One charging affidavit alleges five months' default in support payments, each as a separate count. If the citee has not yet been adjudicated in contempt of a Family Code order, proof of each count in a single proceeding will amount to a "first finding of contempt" under 1218(c)(1); but the citee may be ordered to perform up to 600 hours of community service or be imprisoned for up to 600 hours (25 days).

Attorney Fees And Costs: In addition to the fine, community service and imprisonment penalties discussed above, a party (or party's agent) found in contempt for violating a court order "may" be ordered to pay the charging party's reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred in connection with the contempt proceeding. [Ca Civ Pro 1218(a)]

Fees & Costs:

Attorney Fees:
$250 per hour with a minimum fee varying with the size and complexity of the case.
Costs:
Initial filing fee approximately $40. Other fees which may or not be necessary in your particular case are: motion fees, fees for service of process, deposition fees.
.

SEE LINK FOR BACKUP INFO http://www.kinseylaw.com/clientserv2/famlawservices/enforce/contempt/contempt.html

 

hnyy

Enter subhead content here

Enter content here

Enter supporting content here

SOPHIA OF WISDOM III

WALTER CRONKITE

                   THE END OF THIS MARRIAGE WAS WITNESSED BY DOUGAL C. MACDONALD, ESQ.

THIS IS A DISCLAIMER 
THIS ENTIRE WEBSITE
OF
McRORY VS McRORY
IS 
FOR
CAROLINE E. McRORY (NEE) KENNEDY'S
ATTORNEY'S

SOPHIA OF WISDOM III

MCRORY VS MCRORY

ALL FINDINGS IN QUESTION
OF
CAROLINE E. KENNEDY
WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THESE PERSONS