Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Family Law Procedure

In order for a party to be held in contempt in a Florida family law case, the terms of an order that is alleged to have been violated must be clear and unambiguous. A party cannot be held in contempt of terms of an order that do not exist. This was an issue in the case Prieto v. Rossi, 4D2022-3045 (Fla. 4th DCA April, 17, 2024) in which an attorney representing a party to a divorce was held in contempt of terms of a marital settlement agreement.

The parties to this divorce case entered a marital settlement agreement in which they agreed that two quitclaim deeds would be executed by each spouse - one deed was to be executed by the former wife for the benefit of the former husband which would be held by the former wife’s attorney pending the former husband’s successful refinancing to remove the former wife’s name from the mortgage and note on the property; another deed was to be executed by the former husband and held by his counsel to be released to the former wife if the former husband defaulted on certain obligations under the agreement. Two weeks after the final judgment was signed, the former wife moved to hold the former husband and his lawyer in contempt, alleging that the lawyer failed to deliver a fully executed deed to the former wife’s counsel. The trial court found after a hearing that the former husband and his lawyer violated the terms of the agreement and ordered them to pay the former wife’s attorney’s fees and costs. The former husband’s lawyer appealed.

The appellate court reversed, holding “Here, the MSA imposed upon [the former husband’s lawyer], by its express terms, a legal duty to deliver a fully executed original of Deed 2 to Former Wife’s counsel only if Former Husband either defaulted on any of the installment payments due toward the payoff of the lump sum alimony award or failed to secure a refinancing or satisfaction of the indebtedness on the marital residence within the twelve-month period provided in the MSA. When Former Wife’s contempt motion was filed barely two weeks after entry of the judgment adopting the MSA, Former Husband was not in default of either of those provisions, nor was he ever found to be in default of either of those provisions. Accordingly, Prieto was not under any legal duty to deliver Deed 2 to Former Wife’s counsel prior to any default by Former Husband. Thus, Prieto could not have been held in contempt with respect to Deed 2, which was the only deed inuring to Former Wife’s benefit.”

The court concluded “While the MSA required delivery of those documents ‘necessary to enable the other party to effectuate’ the MSA, the MSA did not expressly require Former Husband to join in Deed 1’s execution. The MSA required only Former Wife to quit claim her interest in the marital residence to Former Husband. [. . .] [the former husband’s lawyer] could not be required to deliver to Former Wife’s counsel what only Former Wife was under an express legal duty to execute and deliver to her counsel as the grantor of her interest in the marital residence. It was not “necessary” as a matter of law for [the former husband’s lawyer] to obtain or deliver a quit claim deed with Former Husband’s signature on Deed 1 as the grantee of a deed inuring to his benefit, nor was there any express requirement that Deed 1 be executed by Former Husband and delivered to Former Wife’s counsel to “effectuate” any of the MSA’s terms. Moreover, Deed 1, executed solely by Former Wife and conveying only her interest in the marital residence to Former Husband, would have sufficed as a conveyance by quit claim deed of “all of her right, title and interest in the marital residence to Former Husband,” which is all that the MSA required of Deed 1. Thus, it was only Former Wife that had an express legal duty to execute and deliver Deed 1 to her counsel, who was required to hold it for Former Husband’s benefit. Accordingly, [the former husband’s lawyer] could not have been held in contempt for failing to timely deliver Deed 1 to Former Wife’s counsel.”

Schedule your meeting with a Miami family law attorney for an analysis of your case.