In re Marriage of Stevens
Annotate this CaseAppellant appealed from the district court's order declining to hold appellee in contempt and directing her to clear title to his vehicle or face entry of a judgment against her. At issue was whether the district court erred when it failed to hold appellee accountable for violating the economic restraining order and when it allowed her to repossess the vehicle. Also at issue was whether appellant's due process rights were violated because he did not receive notice of two hearings. The court held that the district court had broad discretion to determine whether or not to hold appellee in contempt for non-compliance with the decree. The court also held that, although the court acted within its discretion in refusing to issue a contempt order, the court did not have authority to modify the redistribution of property under its prior decree without notice to both parties and an opportunity to be heard, and erred in doing so. The court held, however, that appellant was not prejudiced by the district court's ruling, which was in his favor, and therefore, the court affirmed the district court's judgment.
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.