Narrative Opinion Summary
William Todd Overcash appeals several civil contempt orders. The court reverses the Order on Motion for Contempt and Enforcement, determining it was based on a void order, citing Fisher v. State. Additionally, the Order on Amended Motion for Indirect Civil Contempt is reversed due to a lack of necessary findings of fact regarding Overcash's present ability to make the required payments, referencing Bowen v. Bowen. The court mandates that the lower court must include appropriate findings to support any future orders. The decision affirms all other aspects of the lower court's rulings. The case is reversed and remanded for further proceedings with specific instructions. Judges Torpy, Orfinger, and Cohen concur.
Legal Issues Addressed
Mandate for Lower Court to Include Findingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court instructs the lower court to provide appropriate findings in future orders to ensure compliance with legal standards for contempt rulings.
Reasoning: The court mandates that the lower court must include appropriate findings to support any future orders.
Requirement of Findings of Fact in Civil Contemptsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reverses the amended contempt order due to the absence of required factual findings regarding the appellant's current financial ability to comply with payment orders.
Reasoning: The Order on Amended Motion for Indirect Civil Contempt is reversed due to a lack of necessary findings of fact regarding Overcash's present ability to make the required payments, referencing Bowen v. Bowen.
Reversal of Contempt Orders Based on Void Orderssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court reverses the contempt order because it was founded on a decision that was void, aligning with established precedent.
Reasoning: The court reverses the Order on Motion for Contempt and Enforcement, determining it was based on a void order, citing Fisher v. State.