Anne (Worth) McBride v. Jeffrey R. Worth

MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Reporter of Decisions
Decision: 2015 ME 92Docket: Yor-14-493
Submitted
On Briefs: July 1, 2015
Decided: July 28, 2015
Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, and HJELM, JJ.
ANNE (WORTH) McBRIDE
v.
JEFFREY R. WORTH
PER CURIAM
[¶1] Jeffrey R. Worth appeals from a judgment entered by the District Court
(Springvale, Mulhern, J.) finding Worth in contempt for failure to pay spousal
support to his ex-wife, Anne (Worth) McBride. See M.R. Civ. P. 66. The motion
for contempt that led to this judgment was the fourth post-judgment motion that the
District Court had to consider due to Worth’s continuing failure to comply with his
spousal support obligations despite findings that he has the ability to comply.
[¶2] In prosecuting this appeal, Worth failed entirely to file an appendix to
the briefs, see M.R. App. P. 8(a), (b)(1), and did not supply a transcript of the
proceedings or any substitute for a transcript as authorized by M.R. App. P. 5.
Because of these defects in the appeal, we are unable to provide meaningful
2
appellate review, and we dismiss the appeal. See M.R. App. P. 8(j); Hutchinson v.
Bruyere, 2015 ME 16, ¶¶ 5-10, 111 A.3d 36.
[¶3] We note additionally that the trial court has provided Worth with
multiple opportunities to avoid incarceration despite his consistent failure to pay
spousal support. Worth’s present appeal—combined with the procedural history of
the case—demonstrates Worth’s willingness to use court process to repeatedly
delay or avoid paying an unambiguous spousal support obligation. The remedy of
contempt, with the immediate consequence of imprisonment for failure to comply,
see M.R. Civ. P. 66(d)(1), (2)(D), (3)(A), is appropriate in such circumstances.
The entry is:
Appeal dismissed. Mandate to issue forthwith.
On the briefs:
Jeffrey R. Worth, appellant pro se
Anne (Worth) McBride, appellant pro se
Springvale District Court docket number FM-09-58
FOR CLERK REFERENCE ONLY