|
Smeal Fire Apparatus Co. v. Kreikemeier, 279 Neb. 661 (April 16, 2010), overrules dozens of prior
contempt law cases. It is an important case for family law litigants. Among
other things, the new decision holds that an order of civil contempt may be a final order, and therefore, appealable (for
an order to be able to be appealed, it must be a "final" order). Previously, contempt orders in civil cases such
as contempt actions for failure to pay chid or spousal support were not able to be appealed because they were not considered
"final." The Supreme Court's ruling in a nutshell: 1.
The district court can now award damages to the party injured by the contempt. In a proper case, a court can also
award equitable relief - like modification of the original decree. 2. A party may appeal from a final order of contempt, regardless
whether the court's sanction is labeled civil or criminal. 3. A court can interpret its own decree if a party later
seeks clarification or claims that a provision is unclear. Whether a party may appeal from the order interpreting the decree
depends upon whether it affects a "substantial right." In family law cases, it is not an appealable order if
it does not change the decree's terms. 4. As of the date of the opinion (April 16, 2010), unless Nebraska
statutes say otherwise, to be successful, the person bringing a civil contempt action has to prove it
by clear and convincing evidence. Prior to the Smeal case, in many instances the burden of proof was
"beyond a reasonable doubt."
Regarding
the SmealCourt's change in the burden of proof in civil contempt cases from "beyond a reasonable doubt,"
to "clear and convincing evidence," family law litigants should be aware that in some child and spousal support
contempt actions, Nebraska statute provides a rebuttable presumption of contempt if the person bringing the contempt
action makes a basic showing the person owing support is delinquent in his or her child or spousal support obligations.
The Smeal Court's
holding that equitable relief is available to the person bringing a contempt action is also significant for family
law litigants. It means that the person held in contempt may now be ordered to pay any damages or other sums the
court finds necessary to make the person bringing the contempt action "whole" and heal the damages caused by
the actions of the person found in contempt.
The
district court's new power to award equitable relief to the complainant in a contempt action also means that the district
court can now modify the original decree as part of the contempt action, if it's necessary to remedy the contempt, so long
as there is notice to the person facing contempt.
Additionally, some civil contempt orders are now considered final for purposes
of appeal. The Smeal Court held that, for appeal purposes, the distinction between criminal and civil contempt sanctions
has no relevance to whether a party may appeal from a final order contempt proceeding. The Nebraska Supreme Court, in its
dicta, recognized the sweeping change its holdings in this case will have in Nebraska. "Although there is no graceful
way of retreating from this court's rulings, some of our troubling contempt cases have created needless difficulties at both
the trial and the appellate levels. An untangling of the snarls was long overdue. Our decision changes the legal landscape
of our present contempt law. We overrule a long line of cases affecting a trial court's jurisdiction, an appellate court's
jurisdiction, and the standard of proof in civil contempt cases."
|
