HONIG v. CIGNA INSURANCE CO (1997)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,Second District.

Seymour L. HONIG, Appellant, v. CIGNA INSURANCE CO., Appellee.

No. 95–04014.

Decided: January 31, 1997

Seymour L. Honig, Tampa, pro se. No appearance for Appellee.

Seymour L. Honig appeals an order finding him in contempt. Honig contends that the contempt order should be vacated as the trial court failed to comply with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.830. We agree.

The order imposes no sanctions and does not indicate the type of contempt. Our review of the record reveals that if the offending conduct were to constitute contempt, it would be direct criminal contempt. After being told he was in contempt of court, Honig was not afforded an opportunity to present evidence of excuse or mitigation. Further, the trial court did not make sufficient findings of fact to support a judgment of direct criminal contempt.

Therefore, we reverse and vacate the order finding Honig in contempt.

PER CURIAM.

FULMER, A.C.J., WHATLEY, J., and DAKAN, STEPHEN L., Associate Judge, concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network