Solzsmon v Solzsmon
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. NO. COA01-441 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 21 May 2002 KIMBERLY SOLZSMON v. Guilford County No. 99 CVD 6743 TIMOTHY SOLZSMON Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 2 January 2001 by Judge Thomas G. Foster, Jr. in Guilford County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 12 February 2002. Tracey G. Tankersley for plaintiff-appellee. John W. Lunsford for defendant-appellant. THOMAS, Judge. Defendant, Timothy Solzsmon, appeals the trial court s order holding him in contempt for failure to pay alimony to plaintiff, Kimberly Solzsmon. Pursuant to an earlier order, entered 12 October 2000, defendant was required to pay $1,000.00 per month in current alimony plus $200.00 per month in retroactive alimony for five years. Defendant appealed that order to this Court. On 17 October 2000, plaintiff filed a motion for contempt and an order to show cause. On 2 January 2001, the trial court found defendant to be in civil contempt. He was allowed to purge himself by paying his November bonus to plaintiff, and if the bonus totaled -2less than the $2,400.00 due, defendant difference from his other funds. was to make up the The trial court also ordered defendant to pay plaintiff $384.00 for past due child support, and $250.00 in attorneys fees. Defendant appeals. By two assignments of error, defendant contends the trial court erred: (1) in holding defendant in civil contempt because the evidence showed he did not have the present ability to comply; and (2) in finding that defendant could make payments on arrears without evidence to support the finding, since the amount of defendant s bonus was unknown. This Court has concluded that defendant s first appeal has merit. Since the original order requiring defendant to pay alimony to plaintiff was reversed and the case remanded, we vacate the order finding defendant in contempt. VACATED. Judges GREENE and MCGEE concur. Report per Rule 30(e).
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.
