From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wright v. Wright

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Apr 30, 1976
331 So. 2d 395 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

Opinion

No. 75-1273.

April 30, 1976.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Broward County, George Richardson, Jr., J.

S. Robert Zimmerman, Pompano Beach, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.


We have considered appellant's brief and appendix and find that paragraph 3 of the order of June 13, 1975, is erroneous because it purports to find appellant in contempt for failure to make payments due in the future. It may be when the time comes for these payments to be made appellant will be financially unable to do so without being contemptuous. In other words, an adjudication of contempt should relate to past conduct, not prospective conduct.

However, except for paragraph 3, the order is proper. We therefore direct that the order appealed from be modified by deleting paragraph 3 therefrom.

Affirmed as modified.

WALDEN, C.J., and OWEN and DOWNEY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Wright v. Wright

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Apr 30, 1976
331 So. 2d 395 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)
Case details for

Wright v. Wright

Case Details

Full title:SIMPSON L. WRIGHT, APPELLANT, v. CAROL T. WRIGHT, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Apr 30, 1976

Citations

331 So. 2d 395 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

Citing Cases

Williams v. Jackson Parish

Also, the unconstitutionality of the statute must be specially pleaded and the grounds for the claim…

Ragosta v. Ragosta

An adjudication of civil contempt should relate to past conduct, not prospective conduct. See Wright v.…