In the Missouri Court of Appeals 

Eastern District DIVISION THREE 

 LINDA R. ZWEIFEL,   ) No. ED100416       )  Respondent,    ) Appeal from the Circuit Court       ) of Jefferson County vs.      ) 09JE-DR00715-01       ) RANDALL ZWEIFEL,   ) Honorable Lisa K. Page       )  Appellant.    ) FILED:  May 20, 2014  

OPINION  

 Randall Zweifel (Husband) appeals from a judgment of civil contempt regarding the 

enforcement of divorce decree provisions.  This court dismisses Husband’s claims because he 

has purged himself of the contempt by complying with the contempt order.   

Factual and Procedural History 

 Husband and Linda R. Zweifel (Wife) were divorced in 2012.  On February 4, 2013, 

Wife filed a motion for contempt alleging non-compliance with the parties’ marital settlement 

agreement.  Following a two-day trial, the trial court issued its contempt judgment on July 2, 

2013, in which it required Husband to pay Wife $67,000 and $29,000 to satisfy a property 

settlement and resolution of a short sale on a piece of jointly owned real estate, respectively, 

under the marital settlement agreement.  Husband was granted a credit of $21,000 for monies 

withdrawn by Wife from the business account and Husband was ordered to pay $75,000 plus 

interest and attorneys fees within a specified time in order to purge himself of the contempt.  The 

trial court also found that Wife was entitled to an additional $77,657.46 of the parties’ 2012 

profits emanating from their joint business prior to the divorce, but the trial court did not enforce 

that sum against Husband.  The trial court stated in its judgment:  “Because this was not part of 

the contempt citation for this hearing, this sum is not awarded to [Wife] at this time.”  The trial 

court also reserved judgment on other portions of Wife’s motion for contempt. 

Husband timely filed post-trial motions, which the trial court denied.  On September 4, 

2013, Wife acknowledged satisfaction of the judgment for $75,000 plus interest and dismissed 

without prejudice the remaining counts of her motion for contempt.  Husband now appeals from 

the finding in the contempt judgment that he owes Wife an additional $77,657.46. 

Contempt Appeal Not Reviewable  

 In his appeal, Husband claims the trial court abused its discretion in finding that he owed 

Wife an additional $77,657.46 pursuant to a marital settlement agreement.  While Husband 

concedes that the trial court included this finding as part of the contempt citation and did not 

enter an award for this disputed sum, Husband nevertheless contends he is entitled to appeal 

from this portion of the judgment to avoid any res judicata or collateral estoppel effect on his 

ability to challenge the finding in future proceedings.   

Before reaching the merits of Husband’s claims, this court must, sua sponte, determine 

whether it has jurisdiction over the claims raised on appeal.  In re Marriage of Werths, 33 

S.W.3d 541, 542 (Mo. banc 2000).  Like other judgments, a contempt order must be final before 

it may be appealed.  Emmons v. Emmons, 310 S.W.3d 718, 722 (Mo. App. W.D. 2010).  

Therefore, in order for this court to exercise its jurisdiction, there must be a final, appealable 

judgment.  In re Crow and Gilmore, 103 S.W.3d 778, 780 (Mo. banc 2003).  We examine 

whether the trial court’s contempt order is appealable.   

 2

“The purpose of a civil contempt order is to compel compliance with the relief 

granted....”  Emmons, 310 S.W.3d at 722.  “A party held to be in civil contempt has two options:  

(1) purge [himself] of the contempt by complying with the court’s order, making the case moot 

and unappealable; or (2) appeal the order, but only after the court’s order is enforced by 

incarceration or otherwise.”  Lieurance v. Lieurance, 111 S.W.3d 445, 446 (Mo. App. E.D. 

2003).  Here, Husband chose the first option.  The trial court’s contempt order was issued for the 

purpose of compelling Husband to provide Wife with sums owed pursuant to a marital settlement 

agreement.  Husband purged himself of the contempt by complying with the contempt order.  

The record shows that Husband satisfied the contempt portion of the trial court’s judgment on 

September 4, 2013.  “An appellate court will not review contempt proceedings where the 

contemnor has complied with the order or has purged” himself.  Yeager v. Yeager, 622 S.W.2d 

339, 343 (Mo. App. E.D. 1981).   

Husband’s point challenging the trial court’s judgment finding him in civil contempt is 

not appealable and, therefore, is dismissed.  The dismissal of Husband’s appeal has no collateral 

estoppel effect on the remaining portions of the judgment not awarded or enforced as it did not 

result in a judgment on the merits.    

Conclusion 

 Because there is no final appealable judgment, we lack jurisdiction and dismiss this 

appeal. 

  _________________________________ 

       Mary K. Hoff, Presiding Judge  Kurt S. Odenwald, Judge,  and Angela Turner Quigless, Judge, concur. 

 3