353 P.3d 725
Wyo.2015Background
- Breen and Black divorced in 2008; decree required them to split out-of-pocket medical costs for their four minor daughters and to exchange documentation of charges and payments.
- In 2012 Breen moved for judgment claiming she had paid $4,608.45 of medical expenses and Black had not reimbursed his half; Black responded asserting he owed more in medical expenses (a setoff/affirmative defense).
- At the August 7–8, 2012 hearing Black introduced no proof of his claimed expenses, agreed to pay Breen $4,608.45, and a judgment was entered in Breen’s favor (unappealed).
- In 2014 Black filed a motion to hold Breen in civil contempt for failing to reimburse him for medical bills he had paid; he produced evidence of 160 bills, 75 of which predated the 2012 hearing.
- The district court found Breen willfully avoided communication about the bills, held her in civil contempt, and entered judgment against her for $6,075.13 with a purge provision (monthly payments). Breen appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Breen) | Defendant's Argument (Black) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether Black was barred from recovering medical expenses that accrued before Aug. 2012 because they were compulsory counterclaims/res judicata | Black should have been barred from later asserting pre-2012 expenses because they were compulsory counterclaims or could/should have been raised in the 2012 proceeding | Black argued his 2012 responsive pleading preserved his offset and his later proof was proper | Court held Black’s claims for pre-2012 bills were barred by res judicata; reversed and remanded for recalculation excluding amounts he could have recovered in 2012 |
| 2. Whether clear and convincing evidence supported a finding Breen willfully disobeyed the decree (civil contempt) | Breen contended she lacked notice and did not act willfully; she claimed she had not been properly apprised of amounts owed | Black presented testimony and records showing repeated attempts (calls, texts, emails, mail) to notify Breen and that she avoided communication | Court affirmed: evidence supported a finding of willfulness and civil contempt |
| 3. Whether the district court’s miscalculation of amount owed converted civil contempt into criminal contempt | Breen argued the court’s allowance of barred claims made the order punitive and procedurally defective (criminal) | Black offered no such conversion argument; court treated the proceeding as civil contempt | Court rejected the theory; held miscalculation did not transform the civil contempt into criminal contempt and summarily affirmed that point |
| 4. Whether Breen was held in contempt for failing to cooperate/communicate separate from nonpayment | Breen argued she was not given notice to defend alleged violation of cooperation provisions and that any contempt on that basis was erroneous | Black relied on testimony of communication attempts to show conduct evidencing contempt (and to prove willfulness) | Court concluded it intended to hold Breen in contempt only for failure to pay; cooperative-communication evidence was used to prove willfulness, not a separate contempt ground |
Key Cases Cited
- Lane Co. v. Busch Development, Inc., 662 P.2d 419 (Wyo. 1983) (Rule 13 and compulsory counterclaim principles and defenses)
- Erwin v. State Dep’t of Family Servs., 237 P.3d 409 (Wyo. 2010) (explaining claim preclusion/res judicata terminology)
- R.C.R., Inc. v. Deline, 190 P.3d 140 (Wyo. 2008) (factors for res judicata analysis)
- Roberts v. Locke, 304 P.3d 116 (Wyo. 2013) (standard of review for legal issues)
- Shindell v. Shindell, 322 P.3d 1270 (Wyo. 2014) (elements and burden-shifting in civil contempt; clear-and-convincing standard)