Wright v. Wright

• Decision Date: 10 July 1992
• Parties: Charles W. WRIGHT, v. Denise D. WRIGHT. 2910237.
• Court: Alabama Court of Civil Appeals

Page 450

630 So.2d 450

Charles W. WRIGHT, v. Denise D. WRIGHT.

2910237.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

July 10, 1992.

Charles W. Wright, pro se.

William N. Clark of Redden, Mills & Clark, Birmingham, for appellee.

RUSSELL, Judge.

This is an appeal from the trial court's finding of contempt.

The parties were divorced by the Circuit Court of Shelby County on June 7, 1991. An agreement made part of the final divorce judgment provided, inter alia, that the husband was to execute appropriate deeds transferring his interest in certain real property to the wife. On October 2, 1991, the wife filed a petition for rule nisi, asking the trial court to find the husband in contempt for refusing to execute the proper deeds for transferral of the property. The wife also petitioned the court for an award of an attorney's fee.

A hearing on the wife's petition was held on January 8, 1992, with the husband appearing pro se. By order dated January 17, 1992, the trial court adjudged the husband to be in contempt. The court held that the husband had until March 3, 1992, to purge himself of contempt by executing the appropriate deeds. If he did not do so by that date, he was to be incarcerated in the county jail. The court further ordered the husband to pay $2,000 as an attorney's fee for the wife's counsel. The husband's post-judgment motion was denied, and he now appeals. We affirm.

We would note initially that, pursuant to State ex rel. Payne v. Empire Life Insurance Co., 351 So.2d 538 (Ala.1977), the accused in a contempt proceeding is entitled to assistance of counsel, "if requested." However, nowhere in the record does a request for counsel appear from the husband.

The issue presented for our review is whether the trial court was palpably wrong in holding the husband in contempt and in ordering him to pay an attorney's fee of $2,000.

All courts have inherent authority to punish for contempt in the interest of protecting their dignity and demanding obedience to their decree. The basic purpose of contempt proceedings is to secure prompt compliance with court orders and judgments. Ex parte Cleburne County Board of Education, 545 So.2d 802 (Ala.Civ.App.1989). The scope of review in contempt cases is limited to questions of law and does not extend to the weight and preponderance of the evidence. If there is any legal evidence supporting the judgment of the trial court, we will affirm. McKeever v. McKeever, 528 So.2d 856 (Ala.Civ.App.1988).

The record in the present case reveals that, following the parties' divorce, the husband received a letter from the wife's counsel dated July 11, 1991, with two statutory warranty deeds for the subject property attached. The husband, however, did not sign and return these deeds. Instead, he sent to the wife's counsel two quitclaim deeds he had prepared himself and which contained a provision that the husband was transferring his interest in the property in exchange for payment of future child support. A review of the record, however, reveals that there was nothing in the divorce judgment that provided that the transfer of the husband's interest in the property was consideration for future child support payments.

The record further shows that the wife's counsel notified the husband by letter that the husband's deeds failed to comply with the terms of the judgment. When...