Sharp v. Sharp, s. 7430

• Decision Date: 05 April 1968
• Docket Number: Nos. 7430,7437,s. 7430
• Citation: 209 So.2d 245
• Parties: Howard M. SHARP, John W. Hunter, John W. Hunter Associates, Inc., and Grace Hunter, Appellants, v. Mary Jo SHARP and Marilyn B. Hicks, Appellees.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 245

209 So.2d 245

Howard M. SHARP, John W. Hunter, John W. Hunter Associates, Inc., and Grace Hunter, Appellants, v. Mary Jo SHARP and Marilyn B. Hicks, Appellees.

Nos. 7430, 7437.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 5, 1968.

Rehearing Denied May 6, 1968.

Wotitzky, Wotitzky & Schoonover, Punta Gorda, for appellants.

Allan L. McPeak, Hixon & McPeak, Naples, for appellees.

SMITH, CULVER, Associate Judge.

These consolidated appeals are from orders adjudging the Appellants to be in contempt of the lower Court for violations of restraining orders and from the granting of a permanent injunction enjoining Appellants from invading the privacy of the Appellees.

The Appellant, Howard Sharp, and the Appellee, Mary Jo Sharp, were married in 1959. Two children were born of the marriage. In January of 1965 Appellee, Mary Jo Sharp, sued her husband for divorce. He counterclaimed, and the trial Court denied relief to either party. This holding was affirmed in Sharp v. Sharp, Fla.App., 185 So.2d 508. The couple lived separate and apart as a result of their marital difficulties at all times relevant to the present proceeding. These difficulties were finally resolved by a final decree of divorce entered January 10, 1967 in a separate action.

The Appellant, John W. Hunter Associates, Inc., is a Florida Corporation licensed as a private investigative agency by the State. Appellant, John W. Hunter, is a licensed private investigator and president of the agency. Appellant, Grace Hunter, is a licensed private investigator, and secretary and treasurer of the agency.

In August 1965, during the pendency of the divorce appeal, the Appellant, Howard Sharp, contacted the officers of the agency to employ it for the gathering of information with respect to Appellee, Mary Jo Sharp.

The Appellees are sisters. On September 21, 1965 they filed separate actions against Appellants, Howard Sharp, John Hunter and one Wayne Barnes. Some time later the complaints in both cases were amended so as to make Appellant, John W. Hunter Associates, Inc., a party defendant. Each complaint set forth certain acts of Appellants which were claimed to constitute a violation of Appellees' right of privacy, and prayed for temporary and permanent restraining orders. Temporary restraining orders were entered in each case. A number of rules to show cause were filed during the continuance of the litigation and on October 24, 1966 the Appellant, Howard M. Sharp, was adjudged to be in contempt of Court. The two cases were tried together, and on November 9, 1966 the Court entered its joint final order. This order contains the Court's findings of fact, conclusions of law, and its rulings. The order reads:

'This cause coming on to be heard before me on a series of hearings and the Court having studied the transcript of all prior hearings and at the conclusion of the last hearing hereon the Court being fully advised in the premises, it is upon consideration found that the Court sitting as a trier of the facts has had an opportunity to observe the demeanor, evasions and equivocations of some of the witnesses in this case; the Court being the sole judge of the credibility of the witnesses herein and the Court electing to give weight to such testimony as it finds credible and to disregard such testimony as it finds unworthy of credibility and belief, and the Court being fully advised, the following facts are found:

'(A) That the defendant, Howard M. Sharp, is presently married to the plaintiff, Mary Jo Sharp and as such the Court re-asserts its former ruling that it is legally impossible for the said Howard M. Sharp to invade the privacy of his wife Mary Jo Sharp.

'(B) Defendant Howard M. Sharp has invaded the privacy of Marilyn B. Hicks and for such has been found in contempt of this Court, and the Court further finds that the said Howard M. Sharp is the progenitor of all subsequent invasions hereinafter found.

'(C) That the defendant John W. Hunter is the idem ego of John W. Hunter Associates and John W. Hunter Associates, Inc., and that the acts of one are the acts of the other and the Court does so find.

'(D) That Grace Hunter is an active participant in all the affairs of John W. Hunter as an individual as her husband and under his dominion and control, and as active participant as stockholder, director and officer as well as manager of John W. Hunter Associates and John W. Hunter, Inc.

'(E) That there has been a steady, deliberate, continuing planned invasion of the privacy of both Mary Jo Sharp and Marilyn B. Hicks and that such invasion of privacy was engendered and carried on on the part of Howard M. Sharp and John W. Hunter in his several capacities and Grace Hunter in her vicarious capacity.

'(F) That this invasion of privacy existed both before, during and after the issuance of restraining orders now in effect in this case in direct, flagrant and contemptuous disregard of the orders of this Court.

'WHEREFORE IT IS UPON CONSIDERATION ORDERED AND DECREED that the temporary injunction now in effect in this cause be and they hereby are ratified, confirmed and made permanent, and that the defendants Howard M. Sharp, John W. Hunter and John W. Hunter Associates and Grace Hunter vicariously (vicariously) be and they hereby are permanently enjoined and restrained from interfering with, harassing, annoying, molesting, following, surveying or in any way interfering with the quiet enjoyment of life and privacy of the plaintiff Marilyn B. Hicks either directly or indirectly, personally or by and through any agents, servants, employees or in any way, manner or fashion.

'IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND DECREED that the said defendants John W. Hunter, John W. Hunter Associates, Inc., and Grace Hunter vicariously be and they hereby are permanently enjoined and restrained from interfering with, harassing, annoying, molesting, following, surveying or in any way interfering with the quiet enjoyment of life and privacy of the plaintiff Mary Jo Sharp and that all costs herein are assessed against the defendants.

'It is further found and adjudged that the defendants Howard M. Sharp, John W. Hunter and John W. Hunter Associates, Inc., are in contempt of this Court and this judgment of contempt lies also vicariously against Grace Hunter in her position in relation both to John W. Hunter and John W. Hunter Associates, Inc., and it is further.

'ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this contempt has been willful, flagrant and continuous throughout the course of this litigation whereupon it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that for his indirect participation in the contempt insofar as same applies to invasion of the privacy of Marilyn B. Hicks, that the said defendant Howard M. Sharp be and he hereby is fined the sum of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) payable to the use and benefit of Collier County, Florida, said sum to be paid within ten (10) days of the receipt of this Order,...