2017 Ohio 4141
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Rhea and Rhea divorced in 2001; divorce decree ordered Virgil to pay $1/month spousal support (effective 9/7/2000) and awarded Damita half of Virgil's civil service retirement; decree required cooperation to prepare a QDRO/COAP.
- Damita filed a COAP in Jan 2014 (initially not accepted by plan administrator); Virgil retired ~Apr 1, 2014 and began receiving retirement payments.
- An amended COAP was filed Sept 2014, accepted by the plan administrator, and Damita began receiving benefits Jan 2015.
- Damita moved for contempt (6/19/2015), alleging Virgil had not paid spousal support since 2002 and had withheld her share of retirement benefits; parties stipulated Virgil received $15,120 from Apr–Dec 2014 and owed $171 in spousal support as of March 2016.
- Magistrate found Virgil in contempt for failing to pay spousal support and for refusing to cooperate in executing the COAPs; ordered seven days jail (purgeable by payment of past-due support, $15,120 share, and $2,500 attorney fees, with minimum $500 monthly payments).
- Trial court adopted the magistrate’s decision; Virgil appealed but did not file objections to the magistrate’s decision in the trial court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Virgil was in civil contempt for failing to pay spousal support | Damita argued divorce decree established support obligation and nonpayment proved contempt | Virgil argued court should have withheld payments from his income/assets or modified support; he also asserted inability to pay and later repayment of $171 | Court held no plain error: decree and stipulation established nonpayment; Virgil’s defenses did not overcome contempt finding |
| Whether Virgil’s refusal to sign COAPs justified contempt | Damita argued decree required cooperation and his refusal obstructed division of retirement | Virgil contended COAPs did not comply with statutory requirements and that he lacked cooperation for medical/family reasons | Court held no plain error: record showed lack of cooperation and prior inconsistent positions; contempt for failing to cooperate was proper |
| Whether attorney fees awarded were improper | Damita sought fees under R.C. 3105.18(G) and 3105.73(B) because Virgil’s contempt caused litigation | Virgil claimed Damita acted in retaliation and fees were punitive, not compensatory | Court held fee award permissible and supported by contempt finding and statutory authority; no plain error |
| Whether appellate plain-error review was required given no trial-court objections | Damita relied on magistrate decision adopted by trial court | Virgil failed to object to the magistrate’s decision in the trial court | Court applied plain-error standard, declined to find plain error, affirmed judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (Ohio 1997) (plain-error doctrine in civil cases is disfavored; applicable only in exceptional circumstances)
- Moreland, State v., 50 Ohio St.3d 58 (Ohio 1990) (but-for test for plain error)
- Rossen v. Rossen, 2 Ohio App.2d 381 (Ohio Ct. App. 1964) (establishing that a prior court order plus nonpayment makes a prima facie case of civil contempt)
- Reichert v. Ingersoll, 18 Ohio St.3d 220 (Ohio 1985) (plain error must be clearly apparent and prejudicial to the appellant)