830 N.W.2d 546
N.D.2013Background
- Bachmeier and Stevens, divorced in 2010, had three children and a parenting plan attached to the divorce judgment.
- The plan states the children’s legal residence for school is with Stevens and education decisions are made by the mother.
- Stevens moved to Glenburn (≈30 miles from Granville) and enrolled all three children in Glenburn schools.
- Bachmeier sought an ex parte order barring Glenburn enrollment; the district court declined.
- After letters and filings, Stevens amended for primary residential responsibility; contempt motions were litigated and the district court denied Bachmeier’s contempt petition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether contempt was proven given plan incorporation | Bachmeier: plan not incorporated, thus contempt not established | Stevens: plan incorporated and authorizes school choices | No clear proof of willful contempt; plan incorporation sufficient but not dispositive |
| Whether the parenting plan was properly incorporated into the judgment | Bachmeier: no explicit incorporation language | Stevens: attachment attached to judgment suffices | Parenting plan incorporated; explicit language not required; attachment acceptable |
| Whether Stevens violated by enrolling children in Glenburn and affecting parenting time | Bachmeier: enrollment violated order and disrupted parenting time | Stevens exercised authority consistent with plan; schedules adjusted | No willful violation; transportation adjustments did not amount to contempt |
| Whether the judgment’s vague language precludes a contempt finding | Bachmeier: vague provisions create clear duties | Judgment lacks specifics; cannot sustain contempt on vague terms | Vagueness defeats contempt; not arbitrary or unreasonable to deny contempt |
| Whether a remand or further factual development was needed | Bachmeier: contends for stronger relief | Record shows no willful disobedience | No remand; court’s discretion supports denial of contempt |
Key Cases Cited
- Millang v. Hahn, 582 N.W.2d 665 (ND 1998) (abuse of discretion standard in contempt appeals)
- Sail v. Sail, 804 N.W.2d 378 (ND 2011) (contempt standard and willful disobedience)
- Prchal v. Prchal, 795 N.W.2d 693 (ND 2011) (statutory framework for contempt analysis)
- Harger v. Harger, 644 N.W.2d 182 (ND 2002) (willful violation requirement for contempt)
- Ronning v. Beste, 483 N.W.2d 191 (ND 1992) (clarity requirement for contempt orders)
- Dickson v. Dickson, 568 N.W.2d 284 (ND 1997) (joint custody language insufficient without duties defined)