Donald White v. Phyllis White

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 04/12/2013 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , A l a b a m a A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013 2111060 Donald White v. P h y l l i s White Appeal from J e f f e r s o n C i r c u i t (DR-11-901136) Court THOMAS, J u d g e . Donald White ("the husband") and P h y l l i s w i f e " ) were m a r r i e d on A u g u s t 4, 2007. the wife filed a complaint W h i t e ("the On December 5, i n the Jefferson Circuit 2011, Court seeking a d i v o r c e , a d i v i s i o n o f t h e m a r i t a l a s s e t s and debts, 2111060 and an a w a r d o f a t t o r n e y f e e s . T h e r e a r e no c h i l d r e n of the marriage. On December 12, circuit court 2011, seeking the w i f e her r e s t r a i n e d h e r , had r e q u i r i n g the residence and prohibiting property, On to the and husband stay to away husband December 15, 2011, again. move order alleging She out the that requested of the marital disposing awarding a t t o r n e y of the property. wife and from I t ordered residence, her personal fees. the circuit court issued disposing of the an wife's personal t h e h u s b a n d t o move o u t o f t h e m a r i t a l w i f e ' s p l a c e o f employment. r e q u i r e d the police. for A hearing J a n u a r y 3, 2012, I n an amended o r d e r , t h e husband t o on ex contact r e s i d e n c e and t o s t a y away f r o m t h e m a r i t a l r e s i d e n c e and court an marital p a r t e PFA o r d e r f o r b i d d i n g t h e h u s b a n d f r o m h a v i n g any with the i n j u r e d h e r , and had made from from in ("PFA") § 30-5-1 e t s e q . , a f r a i d t h a t he w o u l d i n j u r e h e r order a petition a protection-from-abuse p u r s u a n t t o A l a . Code 1975, t h e h u s b a n d had filed surrender the w i f e ' s PFA his a f t e r which the c i r c u i t 2 circuit firearm to p e t i t i o n was the the scheduled court entered a 2111060 temporary order on J a n u a r y 6, 2012, e x t e n d i n g pending the entry of f u r t h e r orders Apparently, another hearing t h e PFA of the c i r c u i t order court. on t h e PFA p e t i t i o n was h e l d on J a n u a r y 25, 2012, b e c a u s e , on F e b r u a r y 7, 2012, t h e c i r c u i t court that entered t h e PFA o r d e r further PFA a second temporary order, orders order remained i n effect of the c i r c u i t included court. the c i r c u i t h u s b a n d ] became d i s r u p t i v e i n which i t ordered pending the entry of The F e b r u a r y 7, 2012, court's finding that "[the i n t h e Courtroom, and a c t e d in a t h r e a t e n i n g manner t o w a r d [ t h e w i f e ] a n d t h e C o u r t ' s b a i l i f f . " A f t e r one c o n t i n u a n c e , the t r i a l i n t h i s m a t t e r b e g a n on May 3 0 , 2 0 1 2 ; h o w e v e r , t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t ' s o r d e r , e n t e r e d that same d a y , r e v e a l s t h a t t h e h u s b a n d h a d i n f o r m e d t h e c o u r t that he became i l l a f t e r t h e t r i a l b e g a n a n d t h a t an a m b u l a n c e was called court's the to transport order hospital the c i r c u i t t h e husband t o a h o s p i t a l . The circuit r e q u i r e d t h a t i f t h e h u s b a n d was r e l e a s e d that from same d a y , he was t o i m m e d i a t e l y r e t u r n t o c o u r t a n d , i f n o t , t h a t t h e t r i a l w o u l d resume on June 6, 2012. The trial resumed on June 6, 2012, a t w h i c h time the h u s b a n d a p p e a r e d p r o s e . T h e r e i s no t r a n s c r i p t o f t h e t r i a l ; 3 2111060 however, on June 15, 2012, the c i r c u i t judgment d i v o r c i n g t h e p a r t i e s , remain i n e f f e c t , ordering court entered t h a t t h e PFA a order a n d d i v i d i n g t h e m a r i t a l a s s e t s and d e b t s . T h a t same d a y , t h e c i r c u i t court entered a g a i n s t t h e husband, w h i c h p r o v i d e s , 1 a contempt judgment i n pertinent part: "1. That t h e [ h u s b a n d ] i s h e l d i n d i r e c t contempt o f C o u r t f o r h i s b e h a v i o r d u r i n g two t r i a l s e t t i n g s . T e s t i m o n y i n Open C o u r t was t h a t t h e [ h u s b a n d ] h a d e v e r y i n t e n t i o n o f c o m i n g i n t o C o u r t t o defame t h i s J u d g e , demand t h e C o u r t ' s r e c u s a l , a n d d e l a y t h e s e p r o c e e d i n g s f o r as l o n g as p o s s i b l e . "2. The [ h u s b a n d ] r e f u s e d t o s i t down i n Open C o u r t , and r e f u s e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e t r i a l o f t h i s matter. The w i f e r e c e i v e d t h e m a r i t a l r e s i d e n c e , f o u r v e h i c l e s , and any a s s e t s and d e b t s t h a t were i n h e r name. The h u s b a n d r e c e i v e d any a s s e t s a n d d e b t s t h a t were i n h i s name. The c i r c u i t c o u r t a w a r d e d t h e w i f e $8,678 i n a t t o r n e y f e e s . The i s s u e o f a l i m o n y was r e s e r v e d f o r f u t u r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n . To the e x t e n t t h a t t h e husband c o n t e s t s t h e p r o p e r t y d i v i s i o n i n t h e d i v o r c e j u d g m e n t , we c a n n o t c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e e v i d e n c e included i n the record supports a r e v e r s a l of that aspect of the d i v o r c e judgment. The h u s b a n d makes a b r i e f a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e p r o p e r t y d i v i s i o n i s i n e q u i t a b l e ; h o w e v e r , he does n o t d e v e l o p an argument as t o t h a t i s s u e . I n s t e a d , he f o c u s e s h i s arguments c o n c e r n i n g t h e p r o p r i e t y o f t h e d i v o r c e judgment on t h e c o n t e n t i o n t h a t he was n o t a f f o r d e d due p r o c e s s b e c a u s e he a c t e d p r o s e a t t h e June 6, 2012, t r i a l a n d was "removed" and " i n c a r c e r a t e d " b e f o r e he c o u l d o f f e r h i s t e s t i m o n y . This c o u r t does n o t presume e r r o r , a n d t h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e i n t h e r e c o r d i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e husband's a s s e r t i o n s i n h i s b r i e f are a c c u r a t e . See d i s c u s s i o n i n f r a . 1 4 2111060 "3. D u r i n g t h e p r e v i o u s t r i a l s e t t i n g on J a n u a r y 25, 2012, t h e [husband] l e f t t h e w i t n e s s s t a n d and stomped out o f t h e C o u r t , refusing t o answer questions. "4. The [husband] was d i s r e s p e c t f u l , b e l l i g e r e n t , and d e f i a n t i n Open C o u r t on b o t h o c c a s i o n s . "5. The [husband] i s s e n t e n c e d t o i m p r i s o n m e n t i n the Jefferson County Jail f o r 10 days which r e p r e s e n t s f i v e d a y s f o r t h e two o c c a s i o n s i n w h i c h he e x h i b i t e d a t o t a l l a c k o f r e s p e c t f o r t h i s C o u r t and t h e p r o c e e d i n g s . "6. The S h e r i f f o f J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y i s d i r e c t e d t o s e r v e a c o p y o f t h i s O r d e r upon t h e [husband,] and t a k e him i n t o c u s t o d y f o r t h w i t h . "7 The S h e r i f f o f J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y i s d i r e c t e d t o r e l e a s e t h e [husband] when he has s e r v e d h i s t e n - d a y sentence. "8. The S h e r i f f o f J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y i s f u r t h e r ordered to submit a cost b i l l to the C l e r k of t h i s Court f o r the [husband]'s incarceration, and [husband] s h a l l be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r payment o f a l l such c o s t s . " (Emphasis The added.) husband d i d not timely appealed to t h i s court's review of three file a postjudgment motion. He c o u r t on J u l y 26, 2012, s e e k i n g this i s s u e s : whether the circuit court e r r e d by f a i l i n g t o g r a n t h i s r e q u e s t f o r a c o n t i n u a n c e a t t h e s t a r t of the t r i a l e r r e d by on June 6, 2012, w h e t h e r t h e c i r c u i t r e s u m i n g t h e June 6, 5 2012 trial, court i n the husband's 2111060 absence a f t e r and placed the c i r c u i t court h e l d him i n d i r e c t him i n the b a i l i f f ' s custody, and whether t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t e r r e d by h o l d i n g t h e husband i n d i r e c t for h i s b e h a v i o r i n c o u r t on J a n u a r y 25, The "facts" majority o f t h e argument contempt 2012. and r e c i t a t i o n i n t h e husband's b r i e f t o t h i s contempt court of the i s founded upon a s s e r t i o n s i n c l u d e d i n h i s a f f i d a v i t , which i s appended t o h i s brief; however, we are precluded from considering husband's a f f i d a v i t t h a t i s n o t p a r t o f t h e r e c o r d . v. Shirley, 765 So. 2 d 661, 662 the See G o r e e ( A l a . C i v . App. 2000) ( e x p l a i n i n g t h a t a r e c o r d on a p p e a l c a n n o t be s u p p l e m e n t e d o r e n l a r g e d by t h e attachment brief). Furthermore, o f an a p p e n d i x t o an a p p e l l a n t ' s as t h e w i f e p o i n t s o u t , t h e r e c o r d does not c o n t a i n a t r a n s c r i p t o f t h e ore tenus evidence at t h e June 6, 2012, t r i a l presented at t r i a l , o r a statement pursuant t o Rule presented of the evidence 1 0 ( d ) , A l a . R. App. P. 2 R u l e 1 0 ( d ) , A l a . R. App. P., e n t i t l e d " S t a t e m e n t o f t h e E v i d e n c e o r P r o c e e d i n g s When No R e p o r t Was Made o r When a Transcript I s Unavailable," provides, i n pertinent p a r t : 2 " I f no r e p o r t o f t h e e v i d e n c e o r p r o c e e d i n g s a t a h e a r i n g o r t r i a l was made, o r i f a t r a n s c r i p t i s u n a v a i l a b l e , t h e a p p e l l a n t may p r e p a r e a s t a t e m e n t of the evidence or proceedings from the best available means, including the appellant's 6 2111060 "'An appellate court i s confined i n i t s review to the a p p e l l a t e r e c o r d , t h a t r e c o r d c a n n o t be " c h a n g e d , a l t e r e d , o r v a r i e d on a p p e a l by s t a t e m e n t s i n b r i e f s o f c o u n s e l , " and t h e c o u r t may n o t "assume e r r o r o r presume t h e e x i s t e n c e o f f a c t s as t o w h i c h t h e r e c o r d i s s i l e n t . " Q u i c k v. B u r t o n , 960 So. 2d 678, 680-81 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2006). A c c o r d i n g l y , when, as i n t h i s c a s e , " o r a l t e s t i m o n y i s c o n s i d e r e d by t h e t r i a l c o u r t i n r e a c h i n g i t s j u d g m e n t and t h a t t e s t i m o n y i s n o t p r e s e n t i n t h e r e c o r d as e i t h e r a t r a n s c r i p t o r R u l e 1 0 ( d ) , A [ l a ] . R. A [ p p ] . P., s t a t e m e n t , i t must be c o n c l u s i v e l y presumed that the testimony [was] sufficient to support the judgment." R u d o l p h v. R u d o l p h , 586 So. 2d 929, 930 (Ala. C i v . App. 1 9 9 1 ) . ' " B e v e r l y v. B e v e r l y , 2009) ." M c M i c h a e l v. 2011). McMichael, Thus, t h e r e 2 8 So. 71 i s no So. June 6, 2012, trial request. Furthermore, indicating t h a t the 3d 4 678, (Ala. Civ. 688 evidence i n the t h a t the husband r e q u e s t e d the 3d 1, a continuance o r , i f he there circuit (Ala. Civ. record the i n the record husband i n r e c o l l e c t i o n . ... The s t a t e m e n t , e i t h e r as a p p r o v e d by t h e c o u r t o r as i s s u e d by t h e c o u r t a f t e r i t s r u l i n g , s h a l l be f i l e d w i t h t h e c l e r k o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t , who shall i n c l u d e i t i n the record on appeal." 7 of reason f o r such a evidence court placed App. indicating at the b e g i n n i n g d i d , the i s no App. the 2111060 custody of a b a i l i f f the husband's and c o m p l e t e d t h e June 6, 2012, t r i a l i n absence. "'"An appellate court does n o t presume e r r o r ; t h e a p p e l l a n t has the affirmative duty of showing error. Perkins v. Perkins, 465 So. 2d 414 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 8 4 ) . A p p e l l a t e r e v i e w is l i m i t e d to the record and c a n n o t be a l t e r e d by s t a t e m e n t s in briefs. Bechtel v. Crown C e n t r a l P e t r o l e u m C o r p . , 451 So. 2d 793 (Ala. 1984) . Error asserted on appeal must be a f f i r m a t i v e l y d e m o n s t r a t e d by t h e r e c o r d . I f t h e r e c o r d does n o t d i s c l o s e t h e f a c t s upon w h i c h t h e asserted error i s based, the e r r o r may n o t be c o n s i d e r e d on appeal. L i b e r t y Loan C o r p . of Gadsden v. W i l l i a m s , 406 So. 2d 988 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 8 1 ) . " " ' G r e e r v. G r e e r , 624 So. _ App. ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 3 ) . ' " D u d l e y v. D u d l e y , App. 2 0 1 1 ) . " 85 So. 2d 3d 1043, McCaw v. Shoemaker, 101 So. 3d 787, 793 The record does brief requested a continuance, that 2012, t r i a l 1048 that, at the June (Ala. Civ. 6, assertions 2012, the c i r c u i t or t h a t the c i r c u i t 1077 ( A l a . C i v . App. not s u p p o r t the husband's appellate such a request, 1076, court trial court resumed had 2012) . in his he denied t h e June a f t e r t h e h u s b a n d was h e l d i n d i r e c t c o n t e m p t 8 had 6, and 2111060 removed f r o m t h e p r o c e e d i n g . demonstrate therefore, error the this court regarding failed those to issues; judgment of d i v o r c e i s a f f i r m e d . However, circuit to Thus, t h e h u s b a n d has the record supports the conclusion that the c o u r t e r r e d i n s o f a r as i t h e l d t h e h u s b a n d i n d i r e c t contempt f o r h i s b e h a v i o r 70A(a)(2)(A), A l a . R. i n c o u r t on J a n u a r y 25, C i v . P., defines 2012. Rule " d i r e c t contempt" as " d i s o r d e r l y or i n s o l e n t b e h a v i o r or other misconduct c o m m i t t e d i n open c o u r t , i n t h e p r e s e n c e o f t h e j u d g e , t h a t d i s t u r b s t h e c o u r t ' s b u s i n e s s , where a l l of the e s s e n t i a l elements of the misconduct occur i n t h e p r e s e n c e o f t h e c o u r t and a r e a c t u a l l y o b s e r v e d by the court, and where immediate action is e s s e n t i a l to prevent diminution of the court's d i g n i t y and a u t h o r i t y b e f o r e t h e p u b l i c . " Upon i t s f i n d i n g o f d i r e c t c o n t e m p t , a c o u r t must notify enter the an contemnor of order that includes See Rule 70A(b)(1). observed. reasonable or opportunity mitigate Furthermore, immediately proceeding i t s finding his or her must or within seven of The which pronounce days the 9 the and conduct c o n t e m n o r must h a v e of See Rule its the contempt 70A(b)(3). sign, a evidence t h a t would excuse behavior. court prepare, d e s c r i p t i o n of to present a out a and immediately 70A(b)(2). sentence completion arose. See either of the Rule 2111060 On June 15, 2012, t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t e n t e r e d i t s judgment t h a t , i n p a r t , f o u n d t h e h u s b a n d i n d i r e c t c o n t e m p t due t o h i s b e h a v i o r a t t h e J a n u a r y 25, 2012, p r o c e e d i n g . not support a d e t e r m i n a t i o n The r e c o r d does that the c i r c u i t court notified the husband o f i t s f i n d i n g o f contempt i m m e d i a t e l y o r w i t h i n seven days of demonstrates January that the 25, 2012. husband's Instead, sentence the five of record days' imprisonment i n the county j a i l f o rh i s conduct a t the January 25, 2012, p r o c e e d i n g was i m p o s e d on June 15, 2012, w h i c h i s more t h a n s e v e n d a y s a f t e r t h e J a n u a r y 25, 2012, p r o c e e d i n g . Therefore, insofar behavior we reverse as i t h e l d t h e June t h e husband 6, 2012, c o n t e m p t i n direct contempt judgment for his a t t h e J a n u a r y 25, 2012, p r o c e e d i n g a n d remand t h e cause t o t h e c i r c u i t court with instructions p o r t i o n o f i t s June 15, 2012, c o n t e m p t to vacate judgment. that 3 I n h i s r e p l y b r i e f , t h e husband responds t o t h e w i f e ' s a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e c o n t e m p t i s s u e i s moot b y a s s e r t i n g t h a t t h e c o n t e m p t i s s u e i s n o t moot b e c a u s e he h a s been " d i r e c t e d t o p a y a f i n e " as a p a r t o f t h e s e n t e n c e i m p o s e d f o r h i s c o n t e m p t u o u s b e h a v i o r a t t h e J a n u a r y 25, 2012, p r o c e e d i n g . We a g r e e w i t h t h e h u s b a n d t h a t t h e c o n t e m p t i s s u e i s n o t moot f o r t h a t r e a s o n . A d d i t i o n a l l y , a l t h o u g h t h e husband has f a i l e d t o r a i s e an i s s u e r e g a r d i n g t h e amount o f t h e " f i n e " on a p p e a l , we n o t e t h a t t h e r e i s no p r o v i s i o n empowering a c o u r t o f t h i s s t a t e t o r e q u i r e a contemnor t o pay t h e c o s t o f h i s o r h e r i n c a r c e r a t i o n ; r a t h e r , a c o u r t may p u n i s h a c o n t e m n o r w i t h a 3 10 2111060 JUDGMENT OF DIVORCE AFFIRMED; JUDGMENT OF CONTEMPT REVERSED I N PART; AND CAUSE REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. Thompson, P . J . , a n d P i t t m a n , Moore, a n d D o n a l d s o n , J J . , concur. f i n e o f no more t h a n $100 f o r e a c h i n s t a n c e o f c o n t e m p t . See A l a . Code 1975, § 1 2 - 1 1 - 3 0 ( 5 ) . 11

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.