Zarbo v. Zarbo

Missouri Court of Appeals

Zarbo v. Zarbo

169 S.W.3d 555, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1214, 2005 WL 1949568

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 16, 2005

DocketED 86273

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 169 S.W.3d 555 (Zarbo v. Zarbo) 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.

Bluebook

Zarbo v. Zarbo, 169 S.W.3d 555, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1214, 2005 WL 1949568 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

GEORGE W. DRAPER III, Chief Judge.

Robert Zarbo (Father) appeals from a judgment of civil contempt entered against him. Because there is no final and appeal-able judgment, the appeal is dismissed.

In 2000, the marriage of Father and respondent Starla Zarbo (Mother) was dissolved. Pursuant to that judgment, Father was ordered to pay one-half of the health expenses incurred by the minor child of the marriage. After Father failed to pay, Mother sought a judgment of contempt against him. The court entered a *556 judgment of contempt and Father appealed.

For an appeal to lie, there must be a final judgment or order. Section 512.020 RSMo 2000. A civil contempt order is not final until it is enforced. In re Marriage of Crow and Gilmore, 103 S.W.3d 778, 780 (Mo. banc 2003). Here, the judgment of contempt ordered that Father was sentenced to serve an indefinite term of imprisonment until he paid arrearages of $2,407.03 into the court registry. The judgment then provided that execution of the judgment would be stayed as long as he paid $100 per month directly to Mother. If Father failed to pay, “warrant for his arrest shall issue forthwith.” When the remedy in a contempt judgment is imprisonment, enforcement occurs when actual incarceration occurs or when a warrant or an order of commitment is issued. Id. Here, it does not appear that an order of commitment or warrant has ever issued. Therefore, the contempt order is not enforced and remains interlocutory and unappealable. Id. at 782; See also, Eaton v. Bell, 127 S.W.3d 690, 697 (Mo.App. W.D. 2004).

This court has a duty to examine its jurisdiction sua sponte. South County Orthopedics & Sports Medicine, Inc. v. Pona, 149 S.W.3d 545, 546 (Mo.App. E.D.2004). This Court issued an order directing Father to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed. Father has failed to file a response.

The appeal is dismissed for lack of a final, appealable judgment.

GLENN A. NORTON, J., and NANNETTE A. BAKER, J., concur.

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

GEORGE W. DRAPER III, Chief Judge.

Robert Zarbo (Father) appeals from a judgment of civil contempt entered against him. Because there is no final and appeal-able judgment, the appeal is dismissed.

In 2000, the marriage of Father and respondent Starla Zarbo (Mother) was dissolved. Pursuant to that judgment, Father was ordered to pay one-half of the health expenses incurred by the minor child of the marriage. After Father failed to pay, Mother sought a judgment of contempt against him. The court entered a *556 judgment of contempt and Father appealed.

For an appeal to lie, there must be a final judgment or order. Section 512.020 RSMo 2000. A civil contempt order is not final until it is enforced. In re Marriage of Crow and Gilmore, 103 S.W.3d 778, 780 (Mo. banc 2003). Here, the judgment of contempt ordered that Father was sentenced to serve an indefinite term of imprisonment until he paid arrearages of $2,407.03 into the court registry. The judgment then provided that execution of the judgment would be stayed as long as he paid $100 per month directly to Mother. If Father failed to pay, “warrant for his arrest shall issue forthwith.” When the remedy in a contempt judgment is imprisonment, enforcement occurs when actual incarceration occurs or when a warrant or an order of commitment is issued. Id. Here, it does not appear that an order of commitment or warrant has ever issued. Therefore, the contempt order is not enforced and remains interlocutory and unappealable. Id. at 782; See also, Eaton v. Bell, 127 S.W.3d 690, 697 (Mo.App. W.D. 2004).

This court has a duty to examine its jurisdiction sua sponte. South County Orthopedics & Sports Medicine, Inc. v. Pona, 149 S.W.3d 545, 546 (Mo.App. E.D.2004). This Court issued an order directing Father to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed. Father has failed to file a response.

The appeal is dismissed for lack of a final, appealable judgment.

GLENN A. NORTON, J., and NANNETTE A. BAKER, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 S.W.3d 555, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1214, 2005 WL 1949568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zarbo-v-zarbo-moctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack