Boudwin v. Boudwin, 22681.

• Decision Date: 16 April 1931
• Docket Number: 22681.
• Citation: 298 P. 337,162 Wash. 142
• Court: Washington Supreme Court
• Parties: BOUDWIN v. BOUDWIN.

298 P. 337

162 Wash. 142

BOUDWIN v. BOUDWIN.

No. 22681.

Supreme Court of Washington

April 16, 1931

Department 1.

Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Chester A. Batchelor Judge.

Divorce action by Abigail Boudwin against Charles B. Boudwin. Plaintiff was awarded a divorce, and subsequently the court issued a show cause order citing defendant to appear and answer for contempt for failure to pay alimony, and from an order rendered against defendant in the contempt proceedings defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

See also, 292 P. 1017.

Allen & Walthew, of Seattle, for appellant.

PARKER J.

This is an appeal by the defendant, Charles B. Boudwin, from an order of the superior court of King county rendered against him in a contempt proceeding prosecuted by the plaintiff, Abigail Boudwin, in that court, looking to the compelling of him to pay to her alimony installments.

On May 9, 1919, there was rendered by the superior court for King county in this action a decree awarding to the plaintiff against the defendant a divorce, which decree embodied the following alimony award: 'It is further ordered, adjudged and decreed that the plaintiff Abigail Boudwin be, and she is hereby awarded a judgment against the defendant Charles B. Boudwin in the sum of One Hundred and Fifty ($150.00) Dollars per month, until the further order of the court, payable on the 10th day of each and every month, beginning on the 10th day of June, 1919, Fifty Dollars ($50.00) of which is to be paid for the support of the plaintiff and One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) of which is for the support, use and benefit of the said children, all of which is to be paid to the said plaintiff.'

On November 12, 1929, upon application of the plaintiff filed in the original divorce action, the superior court issued its show cause order citing the defendant to appear and answer as for contempt for his failure to pay accumulated unpaid installments of the alimony award. The purpose of the application manifestly was to coerce payment of the past-due installments rather than to have the defendant punished as for criminal contempt. In pursuance of the show cause order, several continuances and hearings were had, which, on March 21, 1930, resulted in an order being entered by the court which, so far as need be here noticed, reads as follows:

'It is hereby ordered that defendant be and he hereby is adjudged to be in contempt of court and

'It is further ordered that no warrant of commitment of the defendant issue at this time and until the further order of this court, provided and so long as the defendant pays into the registry of this court for the benefit of plaintiff on Monday of each week, beginning on the 23d day of December, 1929, the sum of $15.00 per week to apply on the payments provided in said decree. * * *'

It is from this order that this appeal is prosecuted.

It is contended in behalf of defendant that the original award of alimony amounts to nothing more than an ordinary money judgment against him, payable in installments, and therefore is not enforceable by coercive contempt proceedings against him, but is enforceable only by civil process as an ordinary money judgment. It is true that the original alimony award does not, in terms, affirmatively direct the defendant to pay the installments; but it seems to us that that is what the alimony award means. In Re Cave, 26 Wash. 213, 66 P 425, 426, 90 Am. St. Rep. 736, there was drawn...