King v. King, 2013 Ohio 2038

Jennifer King appeals two decisions from Geauga County: (a) appointment of a receiver and sale of marital property (Downing Drive home, boat, trailer); and (b) contempt findings against Jennifer for failing to purge contempt and for unpaid attorney fees.
Divorce had ordered Jennifer to pay spousal support and to maintain specific mortgage/loan arrangements; Jennifer failed to comply with purge conditions and with listing/selling the property.
The trial court adopted a magistrate’s orders (with modifications) imposing 60 days in jail, a $500 fine, and $3,000 in attorney fees against Jennifer, and suspending/offsetting spousal support.
The court ordered the receiver to sell the Downing Drive residence, boat, and trailer to satisfy the divorce decree.
Jennifer previously challenged these rulings in King I, but this decision reiterates and expands those rulings, affirming the contempt findings and the appointment of a receiver.
On review, the appellate court affirms the trial court, holding Jennifer failed to purge contempt and that appointment of a receiver was appropriate to carry out the decree.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused discretion in sustaining objections and overruling objections without a transcript.	King argued magistrate errors; failure to review transcript prejudiced Jennifer.	King contends no abuse since consented evidence and uncontested findings.	No abuse; transcript not required for uncontested factual correction.
Whether the court properly modified the magistrate’s findings after further proceedings.	King argues improper modification without new findings.	Modification to reflect evidence is proper; no new findings needed.	Proper; modification allowed and supported by evidence.
Whether the court abused in modifying or attaching spousal support to satisfy a judgment.	Jennifer claims improper modification/attachment of support.	Court permitted suspension/offset against attorney fees.	No abuse; offset and modification within discretion.
Whether the contempt finding and associated penalties were warranted based on purge failure.	Jennifer failed to purge as required; penalties justified.	Jennifer did not satisfy purge conditions; noncompliance continued.	Contempt affirmed; jail sentence, fine, and fees upheld.
Whether appointing a receiver to sell marital property was proper given Jennifer's listing attempts.	Receiver needed to ensure sale per decree.	Jennifer had begun listing; dispute over timing.	Proper; appointment preserved decree’s objectives and protected interests.

Nolan v. Nolan, 11th Dist. No. 2007-G-2757, 2008-Ohio-1505 (11th Dist. No. 2007-G-2757, 2008-Ohio-1505) (burden in civil contempt and proof standards; clear and convincing burden discussed)
Gibbs v. Gibbs, 60 Ohio St.3d 69 (Ohio Supreme Court 1991) (abuse-of-discretion standard in contempt; factors to consider)
Lockard v. Lockard, 175 Ohio App.3d 245 (8th Dist. 2008) (receiverships in domestic relations; discretion to appoint)
Park Natl. Bank v. Cattani, Inc., 187 Ohio App.3d 186, 2010-Ohio-1291 (8th Dist. 2010) (recorder powers under R.C. 2735; broad authority to dispose/manage)
Parker v. Elsass, 2002-Ohio-3340 (10th Dist. 2002) (domestic relations receivership guidance)
Beechler v. Beechler, 2010-Ohio-1900 (2d Dist. 2010) (abuse-of-discretion framing in appellate review)