Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

3. Finally, we conclude that for future cases, the standard of proof in civil contempt
proceedings is clear and convincing evidence, unless the Legislature has mandated
another standard.
A jurisdictional issue that does not involve a factual dispute presents a question of
law, which an appellate court independently decides.
[B]oth an original marital dissolution pro eding and proceedings for modification of
dissolution decrees are equitable in nature. Because of the court’s continuing equity
jurisdiction over the decree, the power to provide equitable relief in a contempt
proceeding is particularly appropriate. But there are limits to a court’s power to order
equitable relief in a contempt proceeding. We have held that a court cannot modify
a dissolution decree in a contempt proceeding absent an application for a
modification and notice that a party seeks modification. … So, if a complainant
seeks, or a court is considering, a modification of the underlying decree as an
equitable sanction for contempt of the court’s decree, the alleged contemnor must
first have notice that a modification and a finding of contempt will be at issue. But
when the alleged contemnor has notice and an opportunity to be heard, a court can
modify the underlying decree as a remedy for contempt if the violation cannot be
adequately remedied otherwise.
Civil contempt proceedings are remedial and coercive in their nature.
only civil contempt orders issued before a final judgment in the main action are
interlocutory (and unappealable).
A court that has jurisdiction to issue an order also has the power to enforce it. A
court can issue orders that are necessary to carry its judgment or decree into effect.
Nebraska courts, through their inherent judicial power, have the authority to do all
things reasonably necessary for the proper administration of justice. And this
authority exists apart from any statutory grant of authority. The power to punish for
contempt is incident to every judicial tribune. It is derived from a court’s constitutional
power, without any expressed statutory aid, and is inherent in all courts of record.
A court of equity has the power to interpret its own injunctive decree if a party later
claims that a provision is unclear. The critical question for appeal purposes is
whether a clarification order merely interprets an injunctive decree or whether it
modifies the decree in a way that affects a party’s substantial right.
An appellate court, reviewing a final judgment or order in a contempt proceeding,
reviews for errors appearing on the record. When reviewing a judgment for errors
appearing on the record, the inquiry is whether the decision conforms to the law, is
supported by competent evidence, and is neither arbitrary, capricious, nor
unreasonable.
Under Nebraska law, an order of contempt in a postjudgment proceeding to enforce
a previous final judgment is properly classified as a final order; the contempt order
affects a substantial right, made upon a summary application in an action after
judgment.
For appeal purposes, the distinction between criminal and civil contempt sanctions
has no relevance to whether a party may appeal from a final order in a supplemental
postjudgment contempt proceeding.
A trial court’s factual finding in a contempt pro eding will be upheld on appeal
unless the finding is clearly erroneous.
When a party to an action fails to comply with a court order made for the benefit of
the opposing party, such act is ordinarily a civil contempt, which requires willful
- 12 -