Hughes v. Department of Human Resources

502 S.E.2d 233, 269 Ga. 587, 98 Fulton County D. Rep. 2373, 1998 Ga. LEXIS 745
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJuly 13, 1998
DocketS98A0813
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 502 S.E.2d 233 (Hughes v. Department of Human Resources) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hughes v. Department of Human Resources, 502 S.E.2d 233, 269 Ga. 587, 98 Fulton County D. Rep. 2373, 1998 Ga. LEXIS 745 (Ga. 1998).

Opinions

Fletcher, Presiding Justice.

We granted Joel Thomas Hughes’ application for discretionary appeal to consider whether the trial court abused its discretion by continuing his incarceration for civil contempt. Because the trial court found Hughes guilty of civil contempt and the uncontroverted evidence demonstrates that Hughes is unable to purge himself, we reverse.

The Georgia Department of Human Resources filed a petition for contempt against Hughes for his failure to pay child support. The trial court found Hughes in willful contempt for failing to make payments of $100.00 per week and that his arrearage totaled over $31,000.00. The trial court ordered Hughes incarcerated, but provided that Hughes could purge himself by paying $19,860.10 and $85.00 in court costs.

Almost two months later, Hughes filed a petition for release from incarceration, alleging that he did not have funds or property with which to pay the amount required. At a hearing on his petition, the evidence showed that Hughes had no money or property. Before his incarceration he had employment paying $10.00 per hour and his employer offered to pay $500.00 towards the arrearage if Hughes were released. The trial court found that Hughes had no means by which to pay the arrearage, but that incarceration was warranted because Hughes had allowed his support obligation to accrue for six years.

1. A party who has failed to pay support under a court order when he has the ability to pay may be found guilty of civil or criminal contempt and incarcerated under either.1 When the trial court orders incarceration for an indefinite period until the performance of a specified act, the contempt is civil.2 Because the trial court ordered Hughes’ incarceration until he paid $19,945.10, the contempt in this case was civil in nature.

2. A trial court, however, may not continue incarceration for civil contempt when the respondent lacks the ability to purge himself.3 Imprisonment under civil sanctions is always conditional and a party found in contempt may apply for release at any time upon a showing of inability to pay.4 As we have long held, “[t]he moment it appears [588]*588that there is inability, it would clearly be the duty of the judge to discharge the party.”5 Because the purpose of civil contempt is to provide a remedy and to obtain compliance with the trial court’s orders,6 the justification for imprisonment is lost when that compliance is impossible. The trial court found and DHR admits that Hughes lacks the ability to purge himself because he lacks money and property and his only source of income is manual labor. Under these circumstances, the trial court abused its discretion in continuing Hughes’ incarceration for civil contempt.

Decided July 13, 1998. David A. LaMalva, for appellant. Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, William C. Joy, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Katherine S. Davis, Assistant Attorney General, Shirley Champa, for appellees.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Charles E. Wright v. Nealie M. Wright
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2023
Joseph B. McCarthy v. Annie J. Ashment
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2019
James Bernard v. Theresa Bernard
819 S.E.2d 688 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2018)
In Re: Estate of Jimmy Darryl Banks, Sr.
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2016
In re Estate of Banks
793 S.E.2d 451 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2016)
Sickler v. Sickler
878 N.W.2d 549 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2016)
Miller v. Deal
Supreme Court of Georgia, 2014
Smith v. Smith
748 S.E.2d 456 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2013)
Nathaniel Cross v. Kendra Ivester
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012
Cross v. Ivester
728 S.E.2d 299 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012)
Gallaher v. Breaux
650 S.E.2d 313 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2007)
In Re Earle
545 S.E.2d 405 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2001)
Schmidt v. Schmidt
510 S.E.2d 810 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1999)
Ford v. Ford
509 S.E.2d 612 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1998)
Hughes v. Department of Human Resources
502 S.E.2d 233 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
502 S.E.2d 233, 269 Ga. 587, 98 Fulton County D. Rep. 2373, 1998 Ga. LEXIS 745, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hughes-v-department-of-human-resources-ga-1998.