Bailey v. Amon, 69787
| Decision Date | 18 February 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. 69787,69787 |
| Citation | 941 S.W.2d 657 |
| Parties | Velma G. BAILEY, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Dorian Bell AMON, Respondent/Respondent. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Elbert A. Walton, Jr., St. Louis, for petitioner/appellant.
Dorian Amon, St. Louis, for respondent/respondent.
Velma G. Bailey (mother) appeals from the trial court's contempt judgment finding her in contempt for her refusal to permit Dorian Amon (father) to exercise his visitation and temporary custody rights regarding the parties' daughter, H.K.A., under the court's orders. Father filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that the contempt judgment was not a final appealable order. We dismiss on this ground.
Father was declared the biological father of H.K.A., born September 4, 1989, under the trial court's Consent Order entered on May 20, 1992 and amended on June 23, 1994. Under this order, mother was awarded custody and father was awarded temporary custody and visitation of H.K.A. The order has been the subject of subsequent litigation and modification which we will not recount here.
On father's motion the trial court found mother in civil contempt for depriving father of periods of temporary custody and ordered mother to pay father the sum of $5,000.00 to be set off against any outstanding amounts owing by father under a support order. It specifically ordered:
1. Mother shall be, and hereby is, in contempt for her willful and intentional refusal to permit Father to exercise his rights under the said orders to visitation and temporary custody with the minor child, and, as a result, to compensate Father, at least in part, for the periods of visitation and temporary custody of the minor child lost as a direct result of her behavior, Mother shall pay to Father the sum of $5,000.00, which shall be set off against any outstanding amounts owing by Father to Mother under the said order for support of the minor child.
Father moved to dismiss this appeal on the basis of Houttuin v. Houttuin, 780 S.W.2d 711, 713 (Mo.App.1989) in which we held a civil contempt order is not a final judgment until the order is enforced and is therefore not appealable.
An order finding a party in contempt is interlocutory in nature and is not appealable until it has been enforced. 21 West, Inc. v. Meadowgreen Trails, Inc., 913 S.W.2d 858, 883 (Mo.App.1995). A judgment of contempt ordering the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Marriage of Crow and Gilmore
...Whitworth, 41 S.W.3d at 629; Beaver, 954 S.W.2d at 721; Carmack, 947 S.W.2d at 847; Clark, 945 S.W.2d at 703; Bailey v. Amon, 941 S.W.2d 657, 658 (Mo.App.1997); Strickland, 941 S.W.2d at 867; Brock, 936 S.W.2d at 888-89; Matter of Estate of Keathley, 934 S.W.2d 611, 614 (Mo.App. 1996); C.L.......
-
In re Nangle
...may not be appealed until the order has been enforced, such as by incarceration or by executing on the fine.13 See Bailey v. Amon, 941 S.W.2d 657, 658 (Mo.Ct.App. 1997) (finding that until there has been an attempt to execute on a civil contempt order, the order is interlocutory and not app......
-
Frantz v. Frantz
...1997) ). For purposes of appeal, a civil contempt order is not final until “enforced.” Id. at 781 ; see also Bailey v. Amo n , 941 S.W.2d 657, 658 (Mo.App.E.D. 1997) (“An order finding a party in contempt is interlocutory in nature and not appealable until it has been enforced”). When enfor......
-
Cohen v. Cohen
..."An order finding a party in contempt is interlocutory in nature and is not appealable until it has been enforced." Bailey v. Amon, 941 S.W.2d 657, 658 (Mo.App.1997). "When `enforcement' occurs depends on the remedy." In re Marriage of Crow & Gilmore, 103 S.W.3d 778, 781 (Mo. banc 2003). A ......