Smotherman v. White
This text of 556 S.W.3d 655 (Smotherman v. White) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Chester Wayne Smotherman and Jewell Smotherman (collectively, "the Smothermans") attempt to appeal from a civil contempt judgment that: (1) imposed an accrued per diem fine of $2,370; (2) continued to accrue the per diem fine so long as the Smothermans refused to comply with a November 2016 judgment that resolved a boundary-line dispute between the Smothermans and Tommy and Jeanie White (collectively, "the Whites"); and (3) awarded attorney fees and court costs to the Whites.1 Because there is no indication *657in the record that the Whites, the parties moving for contempt, have executed on the fine, the appeal is dismissed as premature.2
"This Court is obligated to determine its authority sua sponte before considering claims raised on appeal." Edmondson v. Edwards ,
"Civil contempt is intended to benefit a party for whom an order, judgment or decree was entered and is designed to coerce compliance[.]" McMilian v. Rennau ,
Here, nothing in the record indicates that the Whites have executed on the fine levied against the Smothermans. While the contempt judgment does note that execution may issue on the fine imposed against the Smothermans, it is the moving party's actions in executing on the fine-not a statement in the judgment that execution may follow-that renders a civil contempt judgment "enforced." Without execution on the fine by the moving party, the judgment ordering payment of a fine operates as a mere threat of enforcement at some unspecified date in the future. See, e.g. , Frantz , 488 S.W.3d at 173 (civil contempt judgment that imposed a compensatory fine of $3,300 was not appealable because *658the party who moved for contempt had not yet enforced the contempt judgment by executing on the fine); Relaxation, Inc. v. RIS, Inc. ,
Conclusion
There is no final judgment from which the Smothermans may appeal. The appeal is dismissed because an appeal from an unexecuted judgment is premature.
DANIEL E. SCOTT, J.-CONCURS
WILLIAM W. FRANCIS, JR., P.J.-CONCURS
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
556 S.W.3d 655, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smotherman-v-white-moctapp-2018.