Opinion
No. 40086.
March 26, 1956.
1. Contempt — child support — failure to comply with decree requiring — prima facie case — exculpatory proof.
On hearing for contempt for failure of father to comply with decree requiring him to support his infant child, after prima facie case of contempt was made, burden shifted to father to produce exculpatory proof.
2. Contempt — Chancellor's findings — exculpatory proof insufficient to exonerate father.
In such case, Chancellor was justified in finding that father failed to exonerate himself by making required exculpatory proof.
3. Child support — failure to comply with decree requiring — Chancellor's findings — discretion.
No hard and fast rule can be stated that would apply to various situations arising in lower courts in cases of this kind, but Chancellor should be allowed wide latitude in exercise of sound discretion when exerting his coercive powers to enforce his decrees.
Headnotes as approved by Gillespie, J.
APPEAL from the Chancery Court of Hinds County; S.V. ROBERTSON, JR., Chancellor.
W.M. Broom, Crystal Springs, for appellant.
I. The Chancellor erred in ordering the appellant, John H. Matthews, to be remanded to the Hinds County Jail for contempt of Court until such time as he should purge himself of said contempt by paying the appellee the sum of $50 on the support money which was in arrears for the minor child of the parties, which he had been ordered to pay under a prior decree of the Court under the evidence in this cause.
II. The Chancellor erred in ordering the appellant, John H. Matthews, remanded to the Hinds County Jail until such time as he should purge himself of contempt of Court by executing a faithful performance bond in the sum of $500 with good and sufficient sureties conditioned to abide by the orders and decrees of the Court under the evidence in this cause.
Collation of authorities: Ramsay v. Ramsay, 125 Miss. 185, 87 So. 491, 14 A.L.R. 712; Collins v. Collins, 171 Miss. 191, 158 So. 914; Dickerson v. Horn, 210 Miss. 655, 50 So.2d 368; Lewis v. Lewis, 213 Miss. 434, 57 So.2d 163; Gibson v. Clark, 216 Miss. 430, 62 So.2d 585.
Marvin A. Cohen, Watkins, Edwards Ludlam, Jackson, for appellee.
I. The Chancellor was not manifestly wrong in committing appellant to jail for contempt and providing that he was to remain there until such time as he shall purge himself by payment of $50 cash and by the execution of a performance bond in the amount of $500 to insure the performance of decree as to future support for the child of the parties. Collins v. Collins, 171 Miss. 891, 158 So. 914; Dickerson v. Horn, 210 Miss. 655, 50 So.2d 368; Gibson v. Clark, 216 Miss. 430, 62 So.2d 1953; Kincaid v. Kincaid, 213 Miss. 451, 57 So.2d 263; Lewis v. Lewis, 213 Miss. 434, 57 So.2d 163; Muckelrath v. Chezem, 184 Miss. 511, 186 So. 621.
(Hn 1) On a hearing for contempt for failure to comply with a decree requiring appellant to support his infant child, appellee made a prima facie case of contempt on the part of appellant; thereupon the burden shifted to appellant to produce exculpatory proof. (Hn 2) The chancellor was justified in finding that appellant failed to exonerate himself by making the proof required under the rule stated in Kincaid v. Kincaid, 213 Miss. 451, 57 So.2d 263, and (Hn 3) we hold that the case should be affirmed. No hard and fast rule can be stated that would apply to the various situations arising in the lower courts in cases of this kind, and we think the chancellor should be allowed wide latitude in the exercise of sound discretion when exerting his coercive powers to enforce his decrees.
Affirmed.
McGehee, C.J., and Kyle, Arrington and Ethridge, JJ., concur.