Nuveen v. Nuveen
820 N.W.2d 726
| N.D. | 2012Background
- Michiel Nuveen and Elizabeth Nuveen married in 1991; divorce filed in 2007 and financial issues resolved by an amended judgment entered April 26, 2010, with a redacted version May 6, 2010.
- Amended judgment required Michiel to pay Elizabeth cash totaling $513,800: $213,800 by April 15, 2010 and $300,000 plus 6% interest in annual installments starting April 15, 2011.
- June 3, 2010 offer: Michiel’s attorney sent $513,800 with a request for full satisfaction of all amounts due, excluding child/spousal support; Elizabeth rejected to preserve accrued interest and rights on appeal.
- May 13, 2011 application: Elizabeth sought a contempt order for nonpayment after no distributions were made.
- June 23, 2011 tender: Michiel deposited $513,000 plus credits totaling $507,500; Elizabeth accepted but claimed $800 principal and over $36,000 in interest remained due.
- District court found contempt but partially purged by the $513,000 payment and ordered $37,352.71 due within 60 days; Michiel appealed the contempt ruling as untimely.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether contempt was proper for failure to pay as ordered | Nuveen contends no contempt since he tendered payments. | Nuveen argues tender was unconditional and complete. | Contempt upheld; tender not proper due to conditional offers. |
| Whether conditional offers constituted a tender | Nuveen asserts offers satisfied the judgment. | Nuveen’s offers were conditional and did not include accrued interest. | No tender; conditional offers do not extinguish obligation. |
| Whether the trial court correctly treated the June 2011 payment | Nuveen argues payment satisfied the debt. | Payment was not conditioned and credited appropriately. | Payment accepted as partial purge; remaining amount owed. |
| Whether the appeal was timely or properly extended | Nuveen’s appeal was timely despite initial lateness due to excusable neglect. | Timeliness was properly extended by district court under ND Rule 4(c). | Appeal properly before the court. |
Key Cases Cited
- Holkesvig v. Welte, 2012 ND 14 (ND 2012) (contempt standards for willful disobedience)
- Sall v. Sall, 2011 ND 202 (ND 2011) (district court’s discretion in contempt matters)
- Leftbear v. State, 2007 ND 14 (ND 2007) (extension of time for appeal excusable neglect)
- Redfield v. Bitterman, 2000 ND 217 (ND 2000) (abuse of discretion standard in extensions)
- Pifer v. McDermott, 2012 ND 90 (ND 2012) (legal standards for appellate extensions)
- Kouba, 335 N.W.2d 780 (ND 1983) (tender rules—partial offers insufficient)
- Glasser v. Glasser, 2006 ND 238 (ND 2006) (contempt standards and review scope)