Carpenter v. Lyles
2013 Miss. App. LEXIS 299
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Lyles filed a contempt petition against Carpenter for violating their agreed custody order.
- The chancery court found Carpenter in contempt for failing to advise Lyles about Emily’s extracurricular activities.
- The September 16, 2010 agreed order required notifying the other parent of school and extracurricular activities when notice is first received, plus related scheduling and visitation provisions.
- Carpenter was not found in contempt for issues regarding alternating weekends or telephone conversations; the contempt related solely to extracurricular activity notices.
- On appeal, Carpenter argues the contempt finding was in error due to ambiguity in the order and lack of willful noncompliance.
- The Mississippi Supreme Court majority affirms the contempt finding; a dissent would reverse and remand to clarify the order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Carpenter in contempt for failing to notify about extracurricular activities? | Lyles contends Carpenter violated the order by not informing him of Emily's activities. | Carpenter argues she complied and that the order did not obligate her to notify due to ambiguity and because Lyles was the receiving parent who could have learned notices. | Contempt affirmed; no manifest error by trial court. |
| Does ambiguity in the 'receiving parent' concept void the contempt finding? | Lyles maintained the order was clear enough to require notification by Carpenter. | Carpenter asserts ambiguity and argues Lyles bore responsibility as receiving parent to obtain notices. | No reversible error; contempt upheld despite ambiguity. |
| Did the trial court apply the standard for civil contempt correctly? | Lyles seeks enforcement of the order through contempt for noncompliance. | Carpenter asserts compliance with the face of the order and lack of willful disobedience. | Standard applied; contempt sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Goudelock v. Goudelock, 104 So.3d 158 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (contempt requires willful disregard; ambiguity can negate willfulness)
- Pulliam v. Smith, 872 So.2d 790 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004) (conduct must show willful disregard of order)
- Buntyn v. Smallwood, 412 So.2d 236 (Miss. 1982) (reasonable expectations in visitation rights must consider child’s best interests)
- Evans v. Evans, 75 So.3d 1083 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011) (joint custody decisions and duties; scope of rights and responsibilities)
- In re Spencer, 985 So.2d 330 (Miss. 2008) (civil contempt standard; review for manifest error)
- Williamson v. Williamson, 838 So.2d 226 (Miss. 2002) (civil contempt standard and appellate deferential review)
- Corporate Mgmt., Inc. v. Greene Cnty., 23 So.3d 454 (Miss. 2009) (discretionary nature of contempt determinations)
- R.K. v. J.K., 946 So.2d 764 (Miss. 2007) (trial court near parties best positioned to decide contempt issues)
- Giannaris v. Giannaris, 960 So.2d 462 (Miss. 2007) (modifications to noncustodial arrangements may require revisit of orders to serve best interests)