Crabtree v. Crabtree ( 2017 )


Menu:
  • THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE
    CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING
    EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.
    THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
    In The Court of Appeals
    Christine Crabtree, Respondent,
    v.
    Donald Clinton Crabtree, Appellant.
    Appellate Case No. 2016-001362
    Appeal From Sumter County
    George M. McFaddin, Jr., Family Court Judge
    Unpublished Opinion No. 2017-UP-461
    Submitted November 1, 2017 – Filed December 13, 2017
    AFFIRMED
    Harry C. Wilson, Jr., of Lee, Erter, Wilson, Holler &
    Smith, LLC, of Sumter, for Appellant.
    Marian Dawn Nettles, of Nettles, Turbeville & Reddeck,
    of Lake City, and Michael W. Self, of McDougall, Self,
    Currence & McLeod, LLP, of Sumter, both for
    Respondent.
    PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
    authorities: Frye v. Frye, 
    323 S.C. 72
    , 75-76, 
    448 S.E.2d 586
    , 588 (Ct. App. 1994)
    (per curiam) (finding the issue of the father's contempt moot when the father
    complied with the contempt order by paying certain medical bills); Jordan v.
    Harrison, 
    303 S.C. 522
    , 524, 
    402 S.E.2d 188
    , 189 (Ct. App. 1991) (finding the
    issue of the husband's contempt moot when the husband complied with the
    contempt order by paying his child support arrearages and a fine); Chappell v.
    Chappell, 
    282 S.C. 376
    , 377, 
    318 S.E.2d 590
    , 591 (Ct. App. 1984) ("Whe[n] one
    held in contempt for violation of a court order complies with the order, his
    compliance renders the question concerning whether he was in contempt academic
    or moot and precludes appellate review of the contempt proceedings."); Miller v.
    Miller, 
    375 S.C. 443
    , 463, 
    652 S.E.2d 754
    , 764 (Ct. App. 2007) ("Courts, by
    exercising their contempt power, can award attorney's fees under a compensatory
    contempt theory."); 
    id.
     ("Compensatory contempt seeks to reimburse the party for
    the costs it incurs in forcing the non-complying party to obey the court's orders.").
    AFFIRMED.1
    WILLIAMS, THOMAS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.
    1
    We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2017-UP-461

Filed Date: 12/13/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/22/2024