COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Chief Judge Moon, Judges Coleman and Koontz 

Argued at Salem, Virginia 

PATRICK G. McCALL 

v. Record No. 0087-94-3 OPINION BY 

 JUDGE SAM W. COLEMAN III 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, MAY 16, 1995 

 DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, 

 DIVISION OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT, 

 EX REL. BETH WARE 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF AMHERST COUNTY 

J. Michael Gamble, Judge 

 Stephen C. Martin (Pendleton, Martin, 

 Henderson & Garrett, on brief), for appellant. 

 Jack A. Maxwell, Special Counsel D.C.S.E. 

 (Betsy S. Elliott, Senior Special Counsel; 

 James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney General; 

 William H. Hurd, Deputy Attorney General, 

 on brief), for appellee. 

 In this appeal, we uphold the circuit court's ruling 

dismissing a juvenile and domestic relations district court 

(J&DR) appeal because the appellant failed to post a $3,370 bond 

pursuant to the 1992 version of Code § 16.1-107 for an appeal of 

a judgment for the child support arrearages and failed to pursue 

his appeal of the civil contempt order. We hold that when the 

appellant failed to post the appeal bond for the support 

arrearage judgment, the circuit court was not required on its own 

motion to bifurcate the issues and determine whether the 

appellant intended separately to pursue an appeal from the civil 

contempt citation, which did not require the posting of an appeal 

bond under the applicable provision of the 1992 version of 
 -2- 

Code § 16.1-107. 

 The Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court of 

Amherst County, pursuant to a show cause summons, determined that 

Patrick McCall was in arrears in the amount of $3,370 in his 

court-ordered monthly child support. The J&DR court also found 

McCall in civil contempt for willfully disobeying the child 

support order. The J&DR court order sentenced McCall to three 

hundred sixty-five days in jail, suspended all but one hundred 

days, and provided that McCall could purge his contempt by paying 

the support arrearage. McCall appealed the J&DR order to the 

circuit court. 

 On appeal to the circuit court pursuant to Code § 16.1-106, 

the court ruled, in response to appellee's motion to increase the 

appeal bond, that the $450 bond set by the J&DR court was 

inadequate to cover appeal of the $3,370 support arrearage 

judgment. Code § 20-107, as it read in 1992 when the case was 

before the circuit court, provided that the court "shall order a 

bond for that portion of any order entered . . . establishing a 

support arrearage." Accordingly, the court ordered that the 

appeal bond be increased to $3,370, see Code § 16.1-109, and 

further ordered that if McCall failed to post the required bond 

by a date certain, the appeal would be dismissed. When McCall 

failed to post the required bond, the circuit court dismissed the 

appeal. 

 McCall appeals the circuit court's dismissal of his case. 
 -3- 

He contends, for the first time on appeal, that pursuant to the 

1992 version of Code § 16.1-107, he may appeal the civil contempt 

citation without being required to post an appeal bond, even 

though the bond was required for that portion of the order 

establishing the support arrearage. Therefore, according to 

McCall, the trial court erred in dismissing his entire appeal. 

McCall did not at any time in the trial court request that he be 

allowed to proceed with an appeal of the civil contempt order, 

which required no bond, even though the trial court was 

dismissing the appeal for failing to post an appeal bond for the 

support arrearage judgment. 

 When McCall filed his notice of appeal in the J&DR court, he 

appealed the J&DR court's ruling as to all issues. He did not 

specify or indicate in any way that he was appealing only the 

civil contempt citation and not the determination as to the 

amount of his support arrearage. Moreover, when the appellee 

moved to increase the appeal bond and when the court ordered that 

an adequate appeal bond be posted for the support arrearage or 

the appeal would be dismissed, McCall did not move or request 

that he be allowed to proceed with his appeal of the civil 

contempt citation, which required no appeal bond. For the first 

time on appeal, McCall contends that the circuit court should 

have bifurcated the contempt and support issues, on its own 

motion, and should not have dismissed the appeal of the civil 

contempt order. 
 -4- 

 We previously have considered whether an appeal bond was 

required by the pre-1992 version of Code § 16.1-107 in order to 

appeal a civil contempt and support arrearage determination order 

from a J&DR court. See Scheer v. Isaacs, 10 Va. App. 338, 392 

S.E.2d 201 (1990). When Scheer was decided, however, 

Code § 16.1-107 did not contain that provision, which went into 

effect in 1992, that expressly provided no bond shall be required 

to appeal from a J&DR court order, except that the judge shall 

require an appeal bond for that portion of the appealed order 

establishing a support arrearage.1

 The 1992 amendment to Code § 16.1-107 changed the general 

provision that had controlled the outcome in the Scheer case, 

which was that an appeal bond was required in most civil appeals 

from courts not of record.2 The 1992 amendment adopted the 

 

 1 Prior to 1992, Code § 16.1-107 read in part as follows: 

Requirements for appeal.—No such appeal shall be allowed unless 

and until the party applying for the same or someone for him 

shall give bond, in an amount and with sufficient surety approved 

by the judge or by his clerk if there be one, to abide by such 

judgment as may be rendered on appeal if such appeal be 

perfected, or if not so perfected, then to satisfy the judgment 

of the court in which it was rendered; provided, however, that no 

appeal bond shall be required of the Commonwealth and when such 

appeal is proper to protect the estate of a decedent, an infant, 

a convict, an insane person, or the interest of a county, city or 

town, no bond shall be required. 

 2§ 16.1-107. Requirements for appeal.—No appeal shall be 

allowed unless and until the party applying for the same or 

someone for him shall give bond, in an amount and with sufficient 

surety approved by the judge or by his clerk if there is one, to 

abide by such judgment as may be rendered on appeal if such 

appeal is perfected, or if not so perfected, then to satisfy the 

judgment of the court in which it was rendered. However, no 

appeal bond shall be required of the Commonwealth or when an 
 -5- 

general principle that for appeals from a juvenile and domestic 

relations district court "no bond shall be required." However, 

this general principle had an express exception that applies to 

the present case. The 1992 version of the statute provided that 

no bond is required "except that the judge shall order a bond for 

that portion of any order entered or judgment rendered 

establishing a support arrearage or suspending payment of support 

during pendency of an appeal." (emphasis added). Thus, because 

the 1992 amendment to Code § 16.1-107 had a separate provision 

for appeals for J&DR courts, the holding in Scheer that 

Code § 16.1-107 contained "mandatory provisions . . . which 

require a bond in an appeal of a civil case," Scheer, 10 Va. App. 

at 342, 392 S.E.2d at 203, has no application to the present 

case. Accordingly, we must determine whether the 1992 version of 

Code § 16.1-107, which provides that no appeal bond shall be 

required for appeals from J&DR courts except that a circuit court 

"shall order a bond for that portion of any order entered or 

judgment rendered establishing a support arrearage," required the 

circuit court to allow an appeal of all issues from a J&DR court 

and to dismiss only the support issue when the appeal bond is not 

 

appeal is proper to protect the estate of a decedent, an infant, 

a convict, or an insane person, or the interest of a county, city 

or town. Further, no bond shall be required of a party applying 

for an appeal from an order of a juvenile and domestic relations 

district court except that the judge shall order a bond for that 

portion of any order entered or judgment rendered establishing a 

support arrearage or suspending payment of support during 

pendency of an appeal. (emphasis added). 
 -6- 

 

posted.3

 In the present case, when McCall noted his appeal of the 

J&DR court order, he did not specify in the notice of appeal that 

he was appealing only the contempt order and not the 

determination of the support arrearage. Furthermore, when the 

circuit court required him to post additional security for the 

support arrearage as required by Code §§ 20-107 and -109, McCall 

did not pursue an appeal of the contempt order or indicate that 

he was appealing only the contempt finding. Code § 20-107 

required that McCall post adequate bond in order to appeal the 

determination of the child support arrearage. Without posting 

the required bond or without informing the court that he was 

pursuing an appeal of the contempt order and not appealing the 

determination of the support arrearage, McCall disregarded the 

mandate of Code § 20-107 and the court's order to post an 

adequate appeal bond. 

 Neither the J&DR court nor circuit court judge is required 

to determine whether an appellant intends to appeal only a 

"portion" of a court's rulings and order. Accordingly, when 

 3 Subsequent to the General Assembly's 1992 amendment to 

Code § 16.1-107, which provided for an exception to the bond 

requirements for J&DR court appeals, in 1993, the General 

Assembly again amended Code § 16.1-107 by removing the language 

excepting J&DR appeals from the bond requirement and placing it 

in Code § 16.1-296. Thus, the provisions governing appeal bonds 

from J&DR courts are contained in a separate statute, which 

contains the general proviso that no appeal bond is required 

except for that portion of a J&DR court order establishing a 

support arrearage or suspending payment. See Code § 16.1-296(H). 
 -7- 

McCall failed to post the appeal bond required by Code § 20-107 

and ordered by the circuit court and failed to pursue an appeal 

of the contempt order, the circuit judge did not err in 

dismissing McCall's appeal. 

 Accordingly, we affirm the order of the circuit court 

dismissing the appeal. Affirmed.