Ex parte Carpenter, 1876
| Decision Date | 17 May 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 1876,1876 |
| Citation | 566 S.W.2d 123 |
| Parties | Ex parte Dewey Wayne CARPENTER. (14th Dist.) |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Bob Chrane, Houston, for appellant.
Charles G. Schaeffer, Vandervoort & Schaeffer, Houston, for appellee.
Relator, Dewey Wayne Carpenter, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking review of an order of the 311th District Court of Harris County holding him in contempt for failing to comply with certain provisions of a divorce decree entered by that court. We find that one of the provisions relator was held in contempt of court for disobeying is vague and indefinite. Incarceration based on disobedience of such a provision is illegal, and, since but a single penalty was assessed against relator for his disobedience of the several provisions of the court's decree, the entire penalty must fall and the relator be released from custody.
Relator and his wife, Thelma Jean Carpenter, were divorced on March 20, 1975. The divorce decree awarded custody of their minor child to the wife and ordered relator to pay fifty dollars each month as child support and additionally provided:
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND DECREED that Respondent, DEWEY WAYNE CARPENTER, timely pay for any medical, dental, and hospital charges with respect to the child to the extent such charges and expenses exceed in-force insurance coverage on such child.
Following relator's alleged failure to comply with these provisions of the decree, his wife filed a motion to have him held in contempt. The court sustained this motion and ordered relator imprisoned for ten days and until he purged himself of contempt by paying:
(1) $650.00 arrearage in child support;
(2) $390.75 arrearage in medical expenses;
(3) Court costs of contempt proceeding.
Relator urges that the medical expenses provision of the divorce decree is vague and indefinite. We agree. The word "timely" is imprecise and subjective; it does not readily inform the person of the duty imposed upon him. Such an order is unenforceable and cannot support a contempt judgment. Ex parte Slavin, 412 S.W.2d 43 (Tex.Sup.1967).
The court affixed a single penalty for all of relator's contemptuous acts. When one penalty is affixed for more than one act of contempt, and it is found that the relator could not be held in contempt for one of the acts, the whole judgment is tainted and void, and a person held under it is illegally restrained of his liberty. Ex parte Stanford, 557 S.W.2d 346 (...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kimsey v. Kimsey
...to make some payment after the date of divorce, the decree should specify the dates, time, and location of the payment. See Ex parte Carpenter, 566 S.W.2d 123, 124 (Tex.Civ.App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1978, orig. proceeding)(requirement that party "timely" pay for any medical, dental, and ho......
-
Ex parte Herrera
...because relator could not be held in contempt for $500 when he only owed $200 child support arrearage at contempt hearing); Ex parte Carpenter, 566 S.W.2d 123, 124 (Tex.Civ.App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1978, orig. proceeding) (because contempt order included contempt for failing to pay medica......
-
Ex parte Roan
...1990, orig. proceeding). Because the whole judgment is void, the judgment illegally restrains the person held under it. Ex parte Carpenter, 566 S.W.2d 123, 124 (Tex.Civ.App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1978, orig. APPLICATION OF THE LAW TO THE FACTS The trial court found relator guilty of several......
-
Hollingsworth v. Hollingsworth
...inform the person of the duty imposed upon him. Such an order is unenforceable and cannot support a contempt judgment." Ex parte Carpenter, 566 S.W.2d 123, 124 (Tex.Civ.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1978, orig. proceeding). The clarification order provided a precise time and place that appellan......