Jordan v. Jordan

• Decision Date: 19 June 1992
• Citation: 600 So.2d 332
• Parties: Jesse C. JORDAN v. Sara F. JORDAN. 2910123.
• Court: Alabama Court of Civil Appeals

Page 332

600 So.2d 332

Jesse C. JORDAN v. Sara F. JORDAN.

2910123.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

June 19, 1992.

Robert E. Gibney, Mobile, for appellant.

Halron W. Turner of Turner, Onderdonk, Kimbrough & Howell, P.A., Chatom, for appellee.

L. CHARLES WRIGHT, Retired Appellate Judge.

The parties were divorced in June 1991. The parties' personal property was meticulously divided by the trial court and awarded to each party accordingly. In July 1991 the wife filed a motion for the husband to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court for failing to deliver certain items of personal property which were awarded to her in the original decree. Following a hearing on the matter, the trial court found the husband to be in contempt and ordered him to restore the identified properties or, in the alternative, to pay to the wife the cash sum of $10,000. If the husband did not comply with the order a writ of arrest would issue. Upon application of the husband, the trial court stayed enforcement of its contempt order pending appellate review. The husband appealed the contempt order to this court.

Initially, we note that relief from a finding of contempt is now available by appeal. Parcus v. Parcus, [Ms. Feb. 14, 1992], 1992 WL 24149 (Ala.Civ.App.1992); Baker v. Heatherwood Homeowners Ass'n, 587 So.2d 938 (Ala.1991).

The husband asserts that the trial court erred in finding him to be in contempt of the court's previous order.

The determination of whether a party has failed to abide by the terms of a divorce decree or is in contempt of court is a matter committed to the sound discretion of the trial court. Lundy v. Lundy, 586 So.2d 949 (Ala.Civ.App.1991). Our review of such cases is limited to questions of law. The weight of the evidence will not be reviewed other than to determine whether there is any legal evidence to support the trial court's judgment. Lundy.

The record reflects that the parties were married for approximately seven years. No children were born of the marriage. Both parties had been previously married.

Both before and during the marriage the parties were collectors of certain items. The parties' collections ranged from such items as Occupational Japan and Black Americana to cut glass, pottery, and cast iron. Pre-marriage collections were supplemented during the marriage and, in certain instances, a small individual collection became a large joint collection.

In October 1990 the wife moved from the marital residence and filed for divorce. During pendency of the divorce proceeding the husband was allowed to remain in the marital residence. Upon application to the trial court, the wife was allowed to retrieve certain items of personal property. The wife entered the home in November 1990 to obtain the property. While she was in the home, she took numerous photographs of the parties' personal property, including their collections.

In February 1991 the wife, concerned that the husband was selling or secreting the parties' personal property, filed a motion for a restraining order with the trial court. The trial court granted the motion, prohibiting any such actions by the husband.

Following the divorce trial, the court entered a lengthy decree which granted specified items of personal property to each party. The wife was awarded approximately 150 items and the husband was awarded 50.

In June 1991 the wife re-entered the home for the first time since November 1990 to procure her award of personal property. While there she noticed that certain of the items awarded to her were missing and that other items...