Maryland Divorce Lawyer Blog
Ideally, all divorces would proceed maturely, respectfully, and collaboratively for the benefit of both spouses (and their children, if any.) Reality tells us that divorces often fall short of this ideal. Divorces bring out strong emotions, and intense emotions sometimes lead spouses to engage in misconduct. When your spouse has done so, one option may be to pursue a finding of contempt of court. Because Maryland law recognizes many types of contempt, it is wise to consult an experienced Maryland divorce lawyer to advise you about pursuing a contempt case.
Earlier this month, the Appellate Court again waded into the contentious divorce of G.S. and T.S. from Caroline County, a dispute that raised many contempt-related issues.
In 2022, the couple worked out a divorce settlement agreement that they placed “on the record” in court during the second day of their divorce trial. The agreement covered terms related to child custody and parenting time and also directed the husband to pay the wife a monetary award of $100,000.
The husband cut the required $100,000 check but put a stop-payment on it before the wife could cash it. In early December 2022, the wife filed a contempt petition. The judge sided with the wife and found the husband in contempt. The contempt order stated that the husband could “purge” his contempt by complying with the court’s previous orders and giving the wife some extra parenting time during the summer of 2023. The court also imposed what it called a contempt “sanction” of $12,000, an amount equal to the wife’s attorney’s fees.
Two weeks later, the judge signed the judgment of divorce.
Contempt: Civil Vs. Criminal and Direct Vs. Constructive
To better understand why this order did not survive an appeal, some background on contempt of court is helpful. In Maryland, the law recognizes four types of contempt. The law differentiates based on the purpose of the contempt remedy. Criminal contempt involves actions that disrespect the authority and dignity of the court, and the remedy is intended to punish the wrongdoer for his actions. Civil contempt, by contrast, usually regards a general failure to comply with a court order. Civil contempt remedies are designed not to punish but to coerce the wrongdoer to comply.
Civil and criminal contempt can be subdivided by where the contempt occurred. If the contempt happened in the courtroom or so close by that it disrupted the court’s proceedings, then it is direct contempt. It is constructive contempt if it occurred outside the courtroom and did not disrupt the proceedings.
The Mandatory Elements of a Constructive Civil Contempt Order
In the Caroline County divorce, the husband purportedly failed to comply with court orders. That is (or would be) constructive civil contempt. In a constructive civil contempt setting, the judge’s order must do some specific things. One, it must specify the sanction. Two, it must identify what steps the party must take to “purge” the contempt. The sanction and the purge steps must be two distinct things. Three, the order must be “designed to coerce… future compliance,” instead of punishing for past actions.
The contempt order failed for a host of reasons. Constructive civil contempt necessarily involves disregarding one or more court orders. In this case, the husband’s transgressions violated the agreement but not any court orders, so he could not possibly have been in contempt of court. (The contract terms did not become a court judgment until late December 2022, months after the husband’s alleged misconduct and two weeks after the trial court decided he was in contempt.
Additionally, demanding that a party “comply with the court’s orders” is what’s called a “forever purge” because the party cannot fully purge his contempt as long as the orders remain in effect. Forever purge provisions are invalid under Maryland law. Additionally, some of the purported purge provisions – like giving the wife extra parenting time – clearly were not intended to coerce the husband to bring himself into compliance but were punishments designed to penalize the husband for past misconduct. Punishing a party for past misconduct is only allowed when the matter is criminal, not civil, contempt.
Recently, the court added to its list of “what is not allowed,” rejecting the trial judge’s attempt to recharacterize the $12,000 attorney’s fees payment obligation as an assessment of fees for “unjustifiably” denying or interfering with visitation rights under Family Law Section 9-105. While section 9-105 does allow trial courts to order such payments, it does allow courts to do so while their previous orders related to the same payment are on appeal before the Appellate Court.
Do you have questions about a marital settlement agreement or contempt of court in divorce litigation? For clear and reliable answers, contact the knowledgeable Maryland family law attorneys at Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC. Call us today at 301-519-2801 or use our online form to set up your consultation.