Kachmar v. Kachmar, 2014 Ohio 652

Frances filed for divorce after 32 years; issues remaining were property division, spousal support, and attorney fees.
Final decree awarded Frances 60% of marital assets and include the Pontiac Grand Am; other vehicles to be sold.
April 13, 2009 judgment ordered Stephen to pay Frances $3,600 in attorney fees as reasonable and necessary.
Stephen appealed to the Seventh District; we affirmed in part, including attorney fees, but vehicle disposition was not challenged.
May 2, 2011 Frances filed a show cause; December 21, 2011 hearing held; April 16, 2012 findings found Stephen in contempt for fees and allowed 14 days to arrange vehicle sales.
September 21, 2012 compliance hearing resulted in a contempt finding for half-paid fees and a jail sentence of 30 days; stay granted pending appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is the contempt sentence proper after due process and evidence?	Kachmar contends inability to pay was proven and requires dismissal.	Kachmar argues intent need not be expressly found and sentence was permissible.	No abuse of discretion; sentence upheld.

Liming v. Damos, 133 Ohio St.3d 509 (2012-Ohio-4783) (inability to pay as defense in contempt)
State ex rel. Cook v. Cook, 66 Ohio St.3d 566 (2002) (burden on contemnor to prove inability to pay; prima facie evidence of contempt from ordered payment)
In re Carroll, 28 Ohio App.3d 6 (8th Dist.1985) (intent may be inferred from totality of circumstances in indirect contempt)
Midland Steel Prods. Co. v. U.A.W. Local 486, 61 Ohio St.3d 121 (1991) (indirect criminal contempt requires proof beyond reasonable doubt; intent essential)
Brown v. Executive 200, Inc., 64 Ohio St.2d 250 (1980) (criminal contempt punishment as coercive vs. punitive)
State v. Johnson, 93 Ohio St.3d 240 (2001) (intent may be inferred; due process considerations)