Contempt Yes, Jail Not Yet
Evidence of massive spending and other transfers supported a finding that appellant had violated judgment’s directives, by refusing to pay or making herself unable to pay, which supports a judgment of contempt. But to coerce remedy through commitment to jail requires something more: an express finding, supported by substantial evidence, of ability to pay and thus purge herself of contempt. Past ability to pay does not show that contemnor possesses the key to the jailhouse door. Remanded for further proceedings.
In Re the Marriage of: SCOTT D. YONKER, and VALERIE K. YONKER, SCOTT DAMIAN YONKER, Petitioner-Respondent, vs. VALERIE KAY YONKER, n/k/a VALERIE KAY BOYCE, Respondent-Appellant.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District – SD32564
Basically the court has stated that massive spending in the past is not necessarily evidence of ability to pay child support in the currently. This should fall in line with a theory based on reason that finds people who owe money are not able to pay money back if they are in jail. Thus, judges should be showing great reluctance to impose criminal sanctions and/or jail time because a person is unable to pay child support.
However, there are countless people in jail at this very moment for this exact reason. They are unable to pay child support which is sometimes placed upon them without their knowledge and consumes more than half of their paycheck, which is barely livable as is.
After one year of child support payments accrue the courts generally bring a felony case which carries significant jail time. Thus, effectively placing innocent people in jail and further harming their ability to pay their support.
Clarke & Hill Law Office will fight for you and aide you in your case to keep your child support payments livable.