Robert Rector v. Kimberly Kay Ross, 859 S.E.2d 295

Rector and Ross divorced; Rector appealed the family-court divorce order to circuit court and initially did not obtain a stay of family-court proceedings.
The family-court guardian ad litem filed contempt proceedings against Rector for failing to deliver Ross’s separate property; the family court held hearings May 1–2, 2017.
The circuit court granted a stay of “proceedings pending appeal” on May 1, 2017, then later clarified on June 2, 2017 that the family-court contempt proceeding was stayed pending appeal.
Rector later dismissed his appeal; after dismissal, the family court reissued a rule to show cause for Rector and his attorney Schillace for nonappearance at the May 2 hearing.
The circuit court held a March 30, 2018 hearing directed at whether attorney Schillace should be held in contempt and then imposed a $5,000 monetary penalty (later supplemented by $50/day and reduced to judgment of $6,500).
On appeal, the Supreme Court of Appeals reversed the monetary sanction (holding Schillace is entitled to a jury trial under contempt jurisprudence) and affirmed the circuit court’s dismissal of Rector’s writ of prohibition challenging family-court jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Monetary sanction against attorney	Rector: the sanction was improper; counsel (Schillace) was entitled to due process and a jury trial because the fine was a contempt sanction	Judge Jackson/circuit court: the fine was imposed under the court’s inherent authority (not contempt) and was therefore lawful without a jury	Court held the $5,000 fine was a contempt sanction and, under In re Frieda Q., Schillace is entitled to a jury trial; reversed fine and related $1,500 penalty and remanded for jury trial
Writ of prohibition to block family-court contempt	Rector: filing the circuit-court appeal (Jan 23, 2017) deprived the family court of jurisdiction and voided subsequent family-court actions	Respondents/circuit court: no stay was entered initially; family court had jurisdiction to address contempt until stay was granted and that stay ended when Rector dismissed his appeal	Court affirmed dismissal of the writ: family court had jurisdiction to address contempt once the appeal was dismissed and the stay ended

In re Frieda Q., 230 W. Va. 652, 742 S.E.2d 68 (W. Va. 2013) (contemnor’s right to jury when sanction is a fixed monetary penalty or determinate incarceration)
Chrystal R.M. v. Charlie A.L., 194 W. Va. 138, 459 S.E.2d 415 (W. Va. 1995) (de novo review applies to pure questions of law/statutory interpretation)
State ex rel. Callahan v. Santucci, 210 W. Va. 483, 557 S.E.2d 890 (W. Va. 2001) (standard of appellate review for denial of prohibition is de novo)
Jennings v. McDougle, 83 W. Va. 186, 98 S.E. 162 (W. Va. 1919) (prohibition issues: when an inferior court proceeds without jurisdiction, prohibition issues as a matter of right)
State ex rel. Richmond Am. Homes of W. Va., Inc. v. Sanders, 226 W. Va. 103, 697 S.E.2d 139 (W. Va. 2010) (courts must have adequate foundation—rules or inherent authority—before issuing sanctions)
State ex rel. Farber v. Mazzone, 213 W. Va. 661, 584 S.E.2d 517 (W. Va. 2003) (writ of prohibition lies as matter of right when inferior court lacks jurisdiction or exceeds powers)