IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MITCHELL
491 P.3d 759
| Okla. Civ. App. | 2021Background
- Divorce decree (Apr 27, 2012) awarded Petitioner Joyce Mitchell a mobile home park (Four Seasons of Fun, LLC) but required written consent from Respondent Richard Mitchell for any sale under $700,000 and direct payment to Respondent at closing; alternatively a $150,000 payment plan would kick in if the park did not sell within eight years.
- Petitioner sold the park in mid‑October 2016 for $500,000 and did not notify Respondent of the closing until November 17, 2016.
- Respondent obtained a temporary restraining order and the trial court ordered Petitioner to deposit $150,000 into Respondent’s counsel’s trust account pending resolution; the trial court later entered a short order sealing the file.
- Respondent prosecuted contempt proceedings asserting Petitioner willfully violated the decree; the trial court found Petitioner guilty of indirect contempt, awarded $150,000 plus interest, and granted attorney fees and costs to Respondent.
- Petitioner appealed arguing (1) wrongful disqualification of her counsel and exclusion of evidence, (2) improper sealing of the record, (3) lack of willful conduct required for contempt, and (4) erroneous attorney‑fees/interest awards; the Court of Civil Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mitchell) | Defendant's Argument (Richard Mitchell) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disqualification of Petitioner's original counsel & exclusion of evidence | Removal/preclusion prevented testimony showing good‑faith sale communications and Respondent’s notice; prejudiced defense | Trial court acted within discretion; record does not show reversible error | No abuse of discretion; no miscarriage of justice shown; affirmed |
| Sealing the record / gag order | Sealing prevented access to evidence and was improper | Sealing was entered by trial court (limited explanation) | Sealing order failed ORA requirements, but Petitioner never sought correction below — issue waived on appeal; court admonishes future compliance |
| Indirect contempt / willfulness | Sale and delay in notice were not willful; no intent to deprive Respondent | Petitioner failed to obtain required written consent and delayed notice until after closing; trial court as factfinder credited Respondent | Sufficient evidence of willful disobedience of decree; contempt finding affirmed |
| Attorney fees and interest | Fees barred by "hold harmless" clause; interest calculation unspecified | Fees authorized under 43 O.S. §110 for enforcement actions; no preserved objection on interest | Fee award upheld as within statutory authority; interest argument not preserved/reviewed on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- James v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 810 P.2d 365 (Okla. 1991) (trial court has broad discretion on admissibility and conduct of trial)
- Kerr v. Clary, 37 P.3d 841 (Okla. 2001) (standard of review in contempt proceedings; factual findings not revisited on appeal)
- Davon Drilling Co. v. Ginder, 467 P.2d 470 (Okla. 1970) (errors in admission/rejection of evidence require reversal only if miscarriage of justice)
- Davis v. Davis, 739 P.2d 1029 (Okla. Civ. App. 1987) (definition and discretion to punish for indirect contempt)
- Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589 (U.S. 1978) (common‑law presumption of public access to judicial records)
- Bernstein v. Bernstein, 814 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 2016) (First Amendment right of access to certain judicial records)
- Been v. Been, 158 P.3d 491 (Okla. Civ. App. 2007) (appellant bears burden to present record and law showing trial court error)
- Cooper v. Cooper, 220 P.3d 36 (Okla. Civ. App. 2009) (presumption that trial court did not err absent record showing)
- Wilson v. Still, 819 P.2d 714 (Okla. 1991) (issues not raised in trial court are generally waived on appeal)