Lane v. Lane

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Lane v. Lane, 27 App. D.C. 171 (D.C. Cir. 1906)
1906 U.S. App. LEXIS 5150

Lane v. Lane

Opinion of the Court

Mr. Justice Duell

delivered the opinion of the Court:

That the supreme court of the District of Columbia has power to compel obedience to an order awarding alimony by committing the party to jail if he refuses to obey it has been settled by this court. Tolman v. Leonard, 6 App. D. C. 224.

The appellant was in contempt of court in refusing and failing to pay the alimony in accordance with the order of the *173court. His answer to the order to- show cause why he should not be adjudged in contempt was wholly insufficient. He did not deny that he was in receipt of a monthly salary of $100, and his vague and general statements that he was unable to make the payments evidently did not impress the court below, nor have they convinced us. The money which he has expended upon this frivolous appeal would have enabled him to comply with the order of the court below. Appellant in his assignment of errors attacks the sufficiency of the allegations of the petition for the divorce, It is sufficient to say that an answer was filed to the petition, that the order for alimony was consented to, and that the taking of proofs before the examiner had been commenced. The merits of the case are not before us, and, of course, will not be considered at this time.

The order appealed from was properly granted, and it is therefore affirmed, with costs. Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
LANE v. LANE
Status
Published
Syllabus
Contempt; Alimony. 1. The supreme court-of the District of Columbia has power to compel obedience to an order awarding alimony by committing the party to jail if he refuses to obey. (Following Tolman v. Leonard, 6 App. D. C. 224.) 2. A defendant’s answer to an order to show cause why he should not be adjudged in contempt for refusing to obey an order to pay $25 a month alimony, alleging in vague and general terms his inability to make the payments, is insufficient, where it appears that defendant is in receipt of a salary of $100 per month. 3. On an appeal from an order adjudging the appellant in contempt for failing to obey an order, consented to by him, directing him to pay alimony, an assignment of errors attacking the sufficiency of the petition for divorce will not be considered.