Nutter v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County

Decision Date22 July 1960
Citation6 Cal.Rptr. 404,183 Cal.App.2d 72
PartiesNewton NUTTER, Petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent, v. Jacklyn B. NUTTER, Real Party in Interest. Civ. 24764.
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Floyd H. King, Long Beach, for petitioner.

No appearance for respondent.

Hall & Kent, Long Beach, for real party in interest.

KINCAID, Justice pro tem.

Petition for writ of review and to annul an order dated May 24, 1960, holding petitioner in contempt and sentencing him to serve 15 days in jail with placement on probation for one year on condition that he serve five days in jail and to make child support payments thereafter accruing. An order to show cause thereupon issued and the respondent court was directed to refrain from enforcing said contempt order pending such review. The real party in interest has made her return to the petition herein by filing demurrer thereto.

As there is no appeal from an order made in a contempt proceeding, it may be reviewed upon certiorari, if it is in excess of jurisdiction. § 1222, Code of Civ.Proc.; Taylor v. Superior Court, 20 Cal.2d 244, 246 125 P.2d 1; Phillips v. Superior Court, 22 Cal.2d 256, 257, 137 P.2d 838.

The contempt proceeding stems from a divorce action entitled 'Jacklyn B. Nutter, Plaintiff, versus Newton Nutter, Defendant, [petitioner herein] Number LB D-56948.' An interlocutory judgment of divorce was entered on March 4, 1957, under the provisions of which physical custody of the three minor children of the parties was awarded petitioner. Thereafter, by order to show cause and hearing regularly held on November 5, 1959, both parties being present, the court made its order modifying the custody and support provisions of the judgment in that custody of two of the children, Nancy Ann and Suzanne was awarded to the mother and custody of Stephen to petitioner. The latter was ordered to pay the mother for support of said two children the sum of $12.50 per week or a total of $25 per week on each Saturday commencing November 7, 1959, and until further order of court.

On April 8, 1960, affidavit of the mother was filed and order to show cause was issued and served on petitioner to appear and show cause why he should not be held in contempt for wilfully disobeying the order heretofore made in his presence on November 5, 1959. The affidavit alleged that pursuant to such order $550 in weekly payments for support of the two children in the mother's custody had accrued; that petitioner had paid thereon only $75, was delinquent in the sum of $475 and he at all times had the ability to pay.

An affidavit of petitioner in opposition was thereupon filed in which the failure to make said payments was admitted and detailed facts were alleged by which petitioner contended that, during all said period, he was insolvent and was totally unable to pay any money for support of the children as provided by said court order.

At conclusion of the hearing and in the presence of petitioner the court made the following order: 'Defendant's motion to dismiss contempt citation is denied. Plaintiff is sworn and testifies. The report from the Court Trustee, on file herein, is considered in evidence. Defendant moves to dismiss the contempt citation on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction. Court permits plaintiff to re-open his OSC re contempt in chief, and plaintiff is called to the stand for further testimony. Plaintiff rests. Motion denied. Defendant is found guilty of contempt, in that he failed to make payment on account of child support falling due on Nov. 7, 1959, in accordance with the order of 11/5/59, in that he willfully failed to make payment, for which he is sentenced to 5...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Salas v. Cortez
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • 11 Abril 1979
    ...wilful noncompliance with a court order or wilful failure to support, By those having the ability to do so. (Nutter v. Superior Court (1960) 183 Cal.App.2d 72, 75, 6 Cal.Rptr. 404; Pen. Code, § While a judgment in a paternity proceeding is admissible in a nonsupport prosecution, it is not c......
  • Board of Supervisors v. McMahon
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 29 Marzo 1990
    ...916, 141 Cal.Rptr. 133, 569 P.2d 727.) Impossibility of performance is a defense to an action for contempt. (Nutter v. Superior Court (1960) 183 Cal.App.2d 72, 75, 6 Cal.Rptr. 404.) I recognize that an injunction may not be granted "[t]o prevent the execution of a public statute by officers......
  • Brady v. Superior Court In and For San Mateo County
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 7 Febrero 1962
    ...be reviewed on certiorari. (Code Civ.Proc. § 1222; Tripp v. Tripp (1922) 190 Cal. 201, 202, 211 P. 225; Nutter v. Superior Court (1960) 183 Cal.App.2d 72, 73, 6 Cal.Rptr. 404; Auto Equity Sales Inc., v. Superior Court (1962) 57 A.C. 244, 246, 17 CalRptr. 369, 366 P.2d 641.) A series of Cali......
  • Gogerty v. Coachella Valley Junior College Dist.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 20 Noviembre 1961
    ... ... Civ. 6648 ... District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, California ... Nov. 20, 1961 ...         Ray T. Sullivan, Jr., County Counsel, Riverside, for respondents ... Boyd, 22 Cal.2d 685, 690 , 140 P.2d 666; Glide v. Superior Court, 147 Cal. 21, 25 , 81 P. 225; Ransom v. Los Angeles ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT