IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JENNIFER M. MACKEY AND BARRY J. MACKEY Upon the Petition of JENNIFER M. MACKEY, Petitioner-Appellant, And Concerning BARRY J. MACKEY, Respondent-Appellee.

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 13-1752 Filed December 24, 2014 IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JENNIFER M. MACKEY AND BARRY J. MACKEY Upon the Petition of JENNIFER M. MACKEY, Petitioner-Appellant, And Concerning BARRY J. MACKEY, Respondent-Appellee. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Fayette County, Richard D. Stochl, Judge. The petitioner appeals the parties’ dissolution decree. AFFIRMED. Roger L. Sutton of Sutton Law Office, Charles City, for appellant. Luke D. Guthrie of Roberts, Stevens, Prendergast & Guthrie, P.L.L.C., Waterloo, for appellee. Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and Potterfield, JJ. 2 VOGEL, P.J. On appeal, Jennifer Mackey challenges the district court decision finding her in contempt of orders in the parties’ dissolution proceedings. However, on January 31, 2014, Jennifer’s petition for writ of certiorari and request for a stay of the sentencing portion of the finding of contempt was denied by our supreme court. On March 13, 2014, the supreme court ruled Jennifer may not challenge in this appeal the district court decision finding her in contempt, but only raise issues regarding the dissolution decree. She persists in only challenging the entry of the contempt orders and has not raised any issues concerning the parties’ dissolution decree. She has therefore waived those issues on appeal. See Iowa R. App. P. 6.903(2)(g)(3). Because no issues with respect to the dissolution decree have been raised, we affirm the dissolution decree in this memorandum opinion. See Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(e). We conclude each party should pay his or her own appellate attorney fees. Costs of this appeal are assessed to Jennifer. AFFIRMED.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.