From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Flynn v. Flynn

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 26, 1976
330 So. 2d 782 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

Opinion

No. 75-1394.

March 9, 1976. Rehearing Denied April 26, 1976.

Heller Kaplan, Miami, for appellant.

Quinton, Leib Lummus, Miami, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C.J., and HENDRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.


The appellant was found in contempt for failure to comply with certain features of an order entered in a domestic relations case. The order related to temporary alimony and child support.

The appellant contends he is entitled to a reversal because the order failed to make a specific finding that the appellant wilfully disobeyed a prior ruling of the trial court, citing Ratner v. Ratner, Fla.App. 1974, 297 So.2d 344. This court has reexamined Ratner v. Ratner, supra, in light of the recent opinion by the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Garo v. Garo, Fla.App. 1974, 327 So.2d 845 (1976). We have come to the conclusion that the opinion in Garo v. Garo, supra, sets forth the proper test to be made in a case of this matter and, following an examination of the appeal papers, we affirm the order of contempt here under review. Anything to the contrary found in this court's opinion in Ratner v. Ratner, supra, be and the same is hereby receded from.

Therefore, the adjudication of contempt here under review be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Flynn v. Flynn

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 26, 1976
330 So. 2d 782 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)
Case details for

Flynn v. Flynn

Case Details

Full title:JOHN FLYNN, APPELLANT, v. MARY FLYNN, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Apr 26, 1976

Citations

330 So. 2d 782 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

Citing Cases

Damkohler v. Damkohler

Appellant first contends the order is void because it does not make an affirmative finding that appellant had…