Contempt of court


#1

My ex husband was found in civil contempt of court in the fall for failure to pay child support. He was a given a 30 day commitment to jail but allowed to purge this by paying the money within a certain time period. That period has passed and no money. My atty attempted to make a settlement with his but nothing came of it.

In addition, since that order he has only paid a very small fraction of the current support obligations.

My atty wishes to file a motion to show cause concerning the failed purge money and the failure to pay current support. His secretary says that the judge is currently calendering cases for June and July.

My question, I can not wait that long for the purge amount to be satisfied. I am in a financial crisis myself now because of his failure to pay. I wish for these two to be acted on separately and for the judge to know immediately about his failure to purge his commitment. .

Is this unreasonable? Is it normal to lump everything together and to then have to wait for another trial. My atty is on vacation this week. Can I inform the clerk of courts myself about his failure to purge, Do I even need my atty for this? I feel my atty is getting overwhelmed and too busy with other cases.

Plus, do we have to put in the motion to show cause our request to have his wages garnished, or do we just ask for this at the trial?

thank you


#2

Unfortunately there is no way to push your case forward in the court faster. Many people are dealing with this exact issue and the court calendars are extremely full. I agree that you should file a motion to show cause, but if you have a trial date coming, it is likely that this is the fastest way to get in front of the judge. You may request wage withholding at trial.


#3

thank you,

But doesn’t the fact that the one issue of back support of which the judge already found him in contempt and ordered jail if not purged in 90 days (already past due by a month) have some urgency.

Why does this need to go to trial again? The judge already ruled on it, except for the fact that the judge must be made aware of the fact he never paid. Seems like having to wait to have this calendered and waiting until mid summer, defeats the purpose of the judge putting a time limit on the purge.


#4

More likely than not it would take longer to have the contempt hearing rescheduled which is why it is being consolidated into trial.