Watts v. Watts

• Court: Tennessee Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: Frank G. Clement, Jr., P.J., M.S.
• Citation: Watts v. Watts, 519 S.W.3d 572 (Tenn. App. 2016)
• Decision Date: 08 June 2016
• Docket Number: No. M2015–01216–COA–R3–CV,M2015–01216–COA–R3–CV
• Parties: Joyce Bradley WATTS v. Colin Wade WATTS

519 S.W.3d 572

Joyce Bradley WATTS

v.Colin Wade WATTS

No. M2015–01216–COA–R3–CV

Court of Appeals of Tennessee, AT NASHVILLE.

April 12, 2016 Session

Filed June 8, 2016

Jeffrey L. Levy, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Colin Wade Watts.

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Andree S. Blumstein, Solicitor General; and Kathryn A. Baker, Assistant Attorney General, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Frank G. Clement, Jr., P.J., M.S., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Richard R. Dinkins and Arnold B. Goldin, JJ., joined.

OPINION

Frank G. Clement, Jr., P.J., M.S.

At issue is whether a trial court may award attorney's fees that relate to a petition for criminal contempt when the contempt arises in the context of a child support proceeding. Mother filed a post-divorce petition asserting that Father was in criminal contempt for failing to satisfy his support obligations along with a petition seeking a judgment for child support arrearages and attorney's fees. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court found Father guilty of one count of criminal contempt and found that Mother was entitled to a judgment for the unpaid child support. When Mother submitted her application for attorney's fees, Father objected arguing that an award of attorney's fees for the prosecution of the criminal contempt petition would violate his rights under Tenn.Code Ann. § 29–9–103(b) and Article VI, Section 14 of the Tennessee Constitution. Following a hearing, the court awarded Mother her attorney's fees related to the child support judgment pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. § 36–5–103(c), which award is not at issue in this appeal. The court also awarded Mother the attorney's fees she incurred in pursuit of the criminal contempt petition pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. § 36–5–103(c) because "the criminal contempt [petition] served a dual purpose of preserving the power and vindicating the dignity and authority of the law and the Court as well as collecting substantial amounts of child support for the benefit of the minor children." While we recognize that a criminal contempt petition may serve as the catalyst for a delinquent parent to satisfy his or her child support obligations, the purpose of criminal contempt is to uphold the court's authority, not to enforce the private rights of a party. Moreover, the criminal contempt statute, Tenn.Code Ann. § 29–9–103(b), expressly limits the punishment that a court may award, and it makes no provision for the recovery of attorney's fees. Because attorney's fees incurred in a petition for criminal contempt are not provided for by statute or other rule and the purpose of criminal contempt is to uphold the court's authority, not to enforce the private rights of a party, we reverse the award of attorney's fees related to the petition for criminal contempt.

Joyce Bradley Watts ("Mother") and Colin Wade Watts ("Father") were divorced on November 23, 2009. The final divorce decree adopted the Permanent Parenting Plan proposed by the parties, which designated Mother as the primary residential parent of the parties' minor children and required Father to pay child support in the amount of $629 per month. The divorce decree also required Father to pay $100 per month towards an arrearage judgment of $1,890 for pendente lite support.¹

On January 17, 2014, Mother filed a Petition for Contempt against Father, asserting twenty-three counts of criminal contempt for failure to pay child support and seven counts of criminal contempt for failure to pay his share of the children's medical expenses. Mother also sought a judgment for child support arrearages and medical expenses as well as her attorney's fees pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. § 36–5–103(c).

After a hearing, the trial court found Father guilty of one count of criminal contempt for failing to pay child support. The court also determined that Mother was entitled to a judgment of $3,060.80 for child support arrearages and $389.27 for medical expenses. The court ordered Father to serve ten days in jail for his contempt sentence but ultimately granted Father's motion for the sentence to be suspended. The court reserved the issue of Mother's attorney's fees for additional proof, and Mother's counsel was ordered to submit her fee affidavit.

Soon thereafter, Father filed a Motion for a Hearing alleging that an award of attorney's fees for the prosecution of the criminal contempt petition would violate his rights under Tenn.Code Ann. § 29–9–103 and Article VI, Section 14 of the Tennessee Constitution. Father gave notice to the Attorney General, and the State filed a motion to intervene, which was granted by the trial court. After a hearing, the trial court denied Father's statutory and constitutional challenge and ordered Father to pay Mother's attorney's fees. In so holding, the court reasoned:

The Court must first determine whether the contempt action brought against the Father in this cause was civil in nature pursuant to [Tenn.Code Ann.] § 29–9–104 or criminal in nature pursuant to [Tenn.Code Ann.] § 29–9–103.... Under these circumstances, the Court finds that the portion of the petition against the Father dealing with contempt was criminal contempt under [Tenn.Code Ann.] § 29–9–103.

The Court further finds, however, that the petition filed in this cause clearly contained an enforcement element, being the Mother's request for a judgment for unpaid child support and unpaid medical expenses for the benefit of the parties' minor children.... [Mother's testimony] serves the dual purpose of both attempting to establish contempt and providing the Court with sufficient information to grant the requested judgments. The Court therefore finds that pursuant to [Tenn.Code Ann.] § 36–5–103(c), the Mother should clearly be awarded her reasonable attorney's fees in connection with that portion of the petition devoted solely to the enforcement of the Father's child support obligations.

The Court must next determine whether the Mother is entitled to any of her requested attorney's fees related solely to the criminal contempt portion of her petition. Our Appellate Courts have recognized that attorney's fees are appropriate in criminal contempt proceedings involving child custody or child support payments. It is recognized that such fees are expressly provided for by statute governing child custody and support proceedings. The statute reference for such authority was cited by the Mother in her petition, being [Tenn.Code Ann.] § 36–5–103(c). See Sherrod v. Wix, 849 S.W.2d 780 (Tenn.App.Ct.1992) ; Also see Butler v. Butler, 1995 [WL 695123] (Nov. 21, 1995) wherein the Appellate Court found no basis to award attorney's fees to the prevailing party in a suit for violation of an injunction but in a footnote appended to that case cited the Sherrod v. Wix case as a basis for attorney's fees in child support criminal contempts.

....

The Court further notes that the collateral result of the finding of criminal contempt and sentencing of the Father was that he paid the sum of $389.27 in open Court for medical expense reimbursements at the conclusion of the hearing. Thereafter, the Father paid the child support arrearage in the amount of $3,060.80 accompanied by a motion for suspension of his sentence prior to the execution date of the sentence. The Father obviously was hopeful that the Court would consider such a payment in mitigating his request for a suspended sentence. In this instance, the criminal contempt served a dual purpose of preserving the power and vindicating the dignity and authority of the law and the Court as well as collecting substantial amounts of child support for the benefit of the minor children. Moreover, a finding of guilt and the sentence handed down to the Father serves as a deterrent to this Father and the public as a whole from violating the Court's Orders in the future and enhances future compliance.

Based on all of the foregoing, the Court finds that this criminal contempt action, based on Father's failure to comply with child support orders, does indeed contain an enforcement element. As noted above, a review of case law finds such a ruling is consistent with the findings of past Appellant rulings. SeeWilkinson v. Wilkinson, No. M2010–00026–COA–R3–CV (Tenn.Ct.App. Nov. 29, 2011), Clarkson v. Clarkson, 2007 WL 3072772. This Court therefore finds that the Mother is entitled to her reasonable attorney's fees in connection with that portion of the petition dealing solely with the issue of criminal contempt also.

Father initiated this appeal and argues that the trial court's award of attorney's fees related to the criminal contempt petition violates Tenn.Code Ann. § 29–9–103 and Article VI, Section 14 of the Tennessee Constitution.²

STANDARD OF REVIEW

The allowance of attorney's fees is largely in the discretion of the trial court, and we will not interfere except upon a clear showing of abuse of that discretion. Aaron v. Aaron, 909 S.W.2d 408, 411 (Tenn.1995). In order to ascertain whether a decision constitutes an abuse of discretion, we review the trial court's decision to determine whether the factual basis of the decision is supported by sufficient evidence, whether the trial court has correctly identified and properly applied the applicable legal principles, and whether the trial court's decision is within the range of acceptable alternatives. Gooding v. Gooding, 477 S.W.3d 774, 780 (Tenn.Ct.App.2015).

ANALYSIS

I. THE COURT'S CONTEMPT POWER

At common law, the power of courts to punish for contempt was vast and undefined. See Clarkson v. Clarkson, No, M2006–02239–COA–R3–CV, 2007 WL 3072772, at *7 (Tenn.Ct.App. Oct. 22, 2007) (citing Black v. Blount, 938 S.W.2d 394, 397 (Tenn.1996) ). However, because of the potential to abuse this unlimited power, our legislature has adopted specific statutory provisions to limit and define the contempt power. Id. ; see Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 29–9–101 to –108. Accordingly, punishment for contempt...