TIFFANY BELLAMY, Plaintiff - Appellant, vs. IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY, Defendant - Appellee.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 8-709 / 07-1378
Filed October 15, 2008
TIFFANY BELLAMY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
vs.
IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Richard G. Blane II,
Judge.
Domestic abuse order’s protected party seeks certiorari review of the
court’s ruling finding her in contempt. WRIT SUSTAINED.
Michelle Mackel-Wiederanders, Iowa Legal Aid, Des Moines, for appellant.
Alexander Rhoads, Des Moines, for appellee.
Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Vogel and Eisenhauer, JJ.
2
EISENHAUER, J.
The district court adjudged Tiffany Bellamy in contempt for violating
provisions of a no-contact order issued against John Miller, her ex-boyfriend.
Bellamy challenges the court’s contempt finding through a petition for writ of
certiorari. We conclude substantial evidence does not support a finding Bellamy
is in contempt. Accordingly, we annul the judgment and sustain the writ.
I.
Background Facts and Proceedings.
After a hearing on July 19, 2007, the district court issued a domestic
abuse protective order requiring Miller to refrain from contact with Bellamy. The
parties were ordered to return property through third parties.
Miller lives with Bellamy’s ex-husband, Timothy.
On July 22, 2007,
Timothy had visitation with the Bellamy children and was scheduled to return the
children by 6:00, but did not. Bellamy drove to Timothy’s residence at 6:30 to
pick up the children. Bellamy parked on the public street and never left her car.
She threw a CD case of Miller’s into the front yard, allegedly yelled something
about the CD case, and left with her kids. During this time Miller was holding his
son and standing outside near the house and away from the street.
On July 23, 2007, Miller filed a petition initiating contempt proceedings
against Bellamy. He alleged she violated the provisions of the domestic abuse
order directed at him. The district court found Bellamy in contempt and ruled she
initiated contact with Miller and should have returned the CD’s through a third
party. The court sentenced Bellamy to seven days in jail.
3
II.
Standard of Review.
We review certiorari actions at law. Christensen v. Iowa Dist. Court, 578
N.W.2d 675, 678 (Iowa 1998). Our review is limited to examining the district
court’s jurisdiction and the legality of its actions. Id. Illegality occurs when the
court’s fact findings are not supported by substantial evidence or when the court
has not applied the law properly. Amro v. Iowa Dist. Court, 429 N.W.2d 135, 138
(Iowa 1988).
III.
Merits.
“A party alleging contempt has the burden of proving the contemner had a
duty to obey a court order and willfully failed to perform that duty.” Id. Contempt
proceedings are quasi-criminal proceedings; therefore, the willful disobedience of
the contemner must be established by proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. A
finding of willful disobedience requires:
Evidence of conduct that is intentional and deliberate with a bad or
evil purpose, or wanton and in disregard of the rights of others, or
contrary to a known duty, or unauthorized, coupled with an
unconcern whether the contemner had the right or not.
Id. Willfulness is not proven if a contemner shows the order was indefinite or the
contemner was unable to comply with the order. Christensen, 578 N.W.2d at
678.
Substantial evidence to support the district court’s contempt finding
requires evidence that could convince a rational trier of fact the contemner is
guilty of contempt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ary v. Iowa Dist. Court, 735
N.W.2d 621, 624-25 (Iowa 2007).
Bellamy is the protected party in the domestic abuse order directed at
Miller and Miller’s future conduct. This case is not based on an order directed at
4
Bellamy. However, “[c]ontempt orders may be enforced against nonparties who
act . . . in concert with the person to whom the court's order is directed.” Henley
v. Iowa Dist. Court, 533 N.W.2d 199, 202 (Iowa 1995) (finding protected party in
contempt when she acted in conspiracy with the person subject to the court
order).
While Bellamy did toss a CD case out the window and into the yard, there
is no showing she acted “in concert” or “in a conspiracy” with Miller. Rather,
Bellamy drove to her ex-husband’s house to pick up her children, never left the
car, remained on the public street, and Miller happened to be standing outside.
Bellamy’s conduct is not intentional conduct with a bad or evil purpose. There is
no substantial evidence to support a finding beyond a reasonable doubt that
Bellamy willfully disobeyed the court’s order or aided and abetted Miller’s
knowing and intentional violation of his no-contact order.
The judgment holding Bellamy in contempt is annulled and the writ is
sustained.
WRIT SUSTAINED.
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.