105 So. 3d 892
La. Ct. App.2012Background
- Contempt found for Pamela Short's willful failure to answer discovery after a court-ordered compel.
- January 18, 2011 order compelled Ms. Short to answer interrogatories and production requests.
- Ms. Short allegedly answered interrogatories with rude abbreviations: “FU” and “NOYFB.”
- March 21, 2011 hearing on contempt; April 11, 2011 judgment found contempt; May 6, 2011 sentenced Short to 48 hours in jail.
- Appeal challenges no pre-existing order/jail sanction, and lack of due process; ultimately affirmed contempt and sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether contempt was properly found under a pre-existing order | Short argues no pre-existing order. | Court had a January 18, 2011 order to answer discovery. | No abuse; constructive contempt supported. |
| Whether jail time was authorized for discovery contempt | Violation justified sanction. | Sanction allowed under La. C.C.P. Art. 1471. | Allowed sanction of 48 hours. |
| Whether due process was violated due to hearing procedures | No contradictory hearing occurred. | Heard at March 21 hearing; defense opportunity provided. | Due process satisfied. |
| Whether the evidence showed the responses were those of Short | Responses came from Short’s documents. | Attorney signed responses; Short responsible. | Court properly found Short responsible. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brunet v. Magnolia Quarterboats, Inc., 711 So.2d 308 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1998) (constructive contempt standards, discretion of trial court)
- Parish of Jefferson v. Lafreniere Park Foundation, 720 So.2d 359 (La.2000) (discretion in contempt for willful misbehavior)
- DeGruy v. DeGruy, 728 So.2d 914 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1999) (distinguishes direct vs. constructive contempt)
- In re Jones, 54 So.3d 54 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2010) (constructive contempt standards in discovery context)
- (additional cited), 54 So.3d 54 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2010) (writ not considered; related discussion on contempt)