ARDOLINO v. ARDOLINO (1999)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,Third District.

Joseph A. ARDOLINO, Appellant, v. Jolene P. ARDOLINO, Appellee.

No. 98-3090

Decided: February 24, 1999

Before JORGENSON, GODERICH, and SORONDO, JJ.

Keith Mack and Norman S. Segall, Miami, for appellant. Rene A. Sotorrio, Miami, for appellee.

Because the record indicates that the former husband was not afforded his due process rights for the criminal contempt hearing, we reverse the portion of the order finding the former husband in criminal contempt for failure to pay court ordered alimony. Bowen v. Bowen, 471 So.2d 1274, 1277 (Fla. 1985)(holding that “potential criminal contemnors are entitled to the same constitutional due process protections afforded criminal defendants in more typical criminal proceedings.”); Pompey v. Cochran, 685 So.2d 1007, 1012-13 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). The remaining issues raised by the former husband lack merit. Accordingly, we reverse in part and affirm in part.

PER CURIAM.

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Out of date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