HARRINGTON III v. POSPISHIL (2021)

Appellant, Former Husband, challenges an order holding him in contempt for failing to deliver the subject child's passport as required by the parties’ mediated settlement agreement and parenting plan. The trial court's rulings and findings of fact were supported by competent, substantial evidence that Former Husband willfully refused to give Former Wife the passport she reasonably requested. Further, we find no error in the trial court's construction of the agreement and plan.

Finally, we do not deem that the purge provision deviates and modifies the agreement. The purge provision requires Former Husband “to comply with Former Wife's prospective written requests for the minor child's passport and produce same to the Former Wife within 48 hours of her request,” or the court may consider it grounds to modify the agreement. He contends that the court omitted and therefore modified the agreement's provision that the request be reasonable. We do not conclude that the court was modifying the agreement and removing the requirement of reasonableness of the request. It was merely requiring strict compliance with the provision, as the trial court found that Former Husband had unreasonably withheld the passport.¹

Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   We note that in his motion for rehearing of the order of contempt, Former Husband never raised this issue even though he contested almost everything else in the order.

Per Curiam.

Warner, May and Artau, JJ., concur.