Fitch v. Fitch, s. 44066
| Decision Date | 04 January 1974 |
| Docket Number | 44094,Nos. 44066,s. 44066 |
| Citation | 213 N.W.2d 925,298 Minn. 529 |
| Parties | Miriam F. FITCH, Respondent, v. Ronald R. FITCH, Appellant. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
John F. Laue, Minneapolis, for appellant.
Darby Brewer & Evavold, Richard H. Darby, and Dale Evavold, Winona, for respondent.
Considered en banc without oral argument.
Appeals from orders of the district court, one dated October 26, 1972, finding defendant in willful contempt of court for violation of the court's previous order requiring certain payments in a divorce proceeding, and the other dated November 14, 1972, denying a motion to reduce support and alimony payments.
The divorce decree was dated December 7, 1971. Before the divorce action was commenced, defendant had been employed as a school psychologist at an annual salary of $12,000 per annum. The wife was qualified to teach school in Minnesota. The divorce decree gave the wife custody of the two minor children of the parties, ages 8 and 5, with child support at $300 per month. The wife was also awarded alimony in the amount of $200 per month provided she earned less than $200 per month. In the event she earned more than $200 per month, the alimony was fixed at $100 per month.
Defendant was informed in June 1972 by his superiors that his position would not be available to him for the 1972--1973 school year. Defendant then entered a new field and started selling securities. He remarried and is now living in Flint, Michigan.
In August 1972, the wife caused defendant to be cited for contempt as he was then $400 in arrears and had not tendered a deed conveying his interest in the homestead as required in the original decree. At the hearing, defendant appeared in person and by counsel. His counsel prior to the hearing tendered to the wife's counsel a deed to accomplish the homestead transfer. He disclosed by his affidavit that he was without income since June of 1972. The trial court did not examine defendant but found upon the matters presented that he was financially able to make the required payments and found him in willful contempt for not having made them. The court ordered the issuance of a bench warrant providing for defendant's incarceration in January 1973 unless evidence was filed with the court that he had purged himself of the contempt by making up the back payments to August 14, 1972, and by paying to plaintiff one-half of his net earnings after that date until all unpaid back payments are satisfied. He was further required to file with the court an affidavit stating his total earnings since August 14, 1972, and to make monthly reports thereafter until such back payments are satisfied.
By separate order the court denied defendant's motion to reduce the alimony and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Docks Venture, L. L.C. v. Dashing Pac. Grp., Ltd., 2013–0473.
...319 (2012) ; In re Marriage of Crow & Gilmore, 103 S.W.3d 778, 780–781 (Mo.2003) ; Von Hake, 759 P.2d at 1167 ; Fitch v. Fitch, 298 Minn. 529, 530, 213 N.W.2d 925 (1974) ; Wagner v. Warnasch, 156 Tex. 334, 339, 295 S.W.2d 890 (1956) ; Brinkley v. Brinkley, 47 N.Y. 40, 46–47 (1871) ; see als......
-
McCarron v. McCarron, 2130912.
...Crow & Gilmore, 103 S.W.3d 778, 780–781 (Mo.2003) ; Von Hake [v. Thomas ], 759 P.2d [1162] at 1167 [ (Utah 1988) ]; Fitch v. Fitch, 298 Minn. 529, 530, 213 N.W.2d 925 (1974) ; Wagner v. Warnasch, 156 Tex. 334, 339, 295 S.W.2d 890 (1956) ; Brinkley v. Brinkley, 47 N.Y. 40, 46–47 (1871) ; see......
-
Cisek v. Cisek, C9-87-179
...discretion of the trial court, and will not be reversed except upon a clear showing of an abuse of discretion. Fitch v. Fitch, 298 Minn. 529, 530, 213 N.W.2d 925, 927 (1974). In order for this court to find the trial court abused its discretion, there must have been a clearly erroneous conc......
-
Wiese v. Wiese
...shows that there has been an abuse of that discretion. Bissell v. Bissell, 291 Minn. 348, 191 N.W.2d 425 (1971); Fitch v. Fitch, 298 Minn. 529, 213 N.W.2d 925 (1974). The record here reveals that appellant's income has increased steadily over time, but respondent's wages have risen only sli......