Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Family Services v. Ivy
2011 Ky. LEXIS 151
| Ky. | 2011Background
- Ivy, an SSI recipient, is the mother of D.G. and has four children total; her income is limited to SSI benefits.
- In May 2008 Ivy was ordered to pay $106 per month for D.G.'s support based on combined incomes including Ivy's SSI.
- Cabinet became assignee for D.G.'s support in June 2008; by February 2009 it moved to hold Ivy in contempt for arrears of about $1,125.
- At the show-cause hearing, Ivy presented that her SSI is deposited in a trust and largely used for her own shelter and necessities, leaving only a small discretionary amount.
- The family court reduced Ivy's obligation to $60 per month, found Ivy able-bodied, and ordered arrears plus $5 per month for the remaining arrears, while holding her in contempt.
- Court of Appeals reversed, finding insufficient evidence that Ivy could pay and that contempt was improper; the Kentucky Supreme Court granted review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether guidelines-based support can be reduced as unjust or inappropriate | Ivy was unable to pay due to SSI limitations; guidelines reduction is appropriate. | The guidelines include SSI and may be deviated from only for unjust or inappropriate reasons; reduction is permissible under 403.211(2). | Deviations from guidelines permitted; remand to determine if the 60-dollar figure was justified with proper findings. |
| Whether inability to pay precludes a contempt finding | SSI-disabled but capable of some income; contempt may be appropriate for nonpayment. | Inability to pay should preclude contempt; evidence shows Ivy lacked ability to pay. | Contempt finding improper; inability to pay precludes contempt where no purge capacity is shown. |
| Whether SSI affects enforcement under federal law | SSI benefits are protected; collection of support is not allowed against SSI. | SSI can be used to compute support and may accrue; enforcement can proceed with balance between interests. | SSI may be used in calculation; enforcement may occur if evidence shows ability to pay; not preempted categorically. |
| Whether the court properly proceeded with contempt and remedies | Contempt was warranted given nonpayment. | Sanctions were improper or misapplied; need accurate purge conditions and evidence. | Contempt and coercive remedy were improper; remand for proper findings and remediation consistent with the opinion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Artrip v. Noe, 311 S.W.3d 229 (Ky. 2010) (trial court wide discretion in setting child support and deviations from guidelines)
- Keplinger v. Keplinger, 839 S.W.2d 566 (Ky. App. 1992) (deviation from guidelines requires meaningful reasons)
- Morris v. Morris, 984 S.W.2d 840 (Ky. 1998) (SSI included in gross income; Supremacy Clause discussion of federal-law preemption)
- Rose v. Rose, 481 U.S. 619 (1987) (federal preemption and SSI-like benefits in contempt actions case-by-case)
- United Mine Workers of Am. v. United States, 330 U.S. 258 (1947) (civil contempt vs. coercive measures; standards for remedies)
- Shillitani v. United States, 384 U.S. 364 (1966) (purge requirements and civil contempt standards)
- Lewis v. Lewis, 875 S.W.2d 862 (Ky. 1993) (civil contempt burden shifting and burden to contemnor)
- Dalton v. Dalton, 367 S.W.2d 840 (Ky. 1963) (evidence burden in contempt matters)
- Arrington v. Dep't of Human Resources, 402 Md. 79 (Md. 2007) (Maryland civility on contempts and rehabilitation-oriented remedies)