Opinion ID: 2272370
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Timely Filing of Appeal from a Judgment of Civil Contempt

Text: A civil contempt order is appealable once it becomes final. In re Marriage of Crow and Gilmore, 103 S.W.3d 778, 780 (Mo. banc 2003). The order is not final until it is `enforced.' Id. at 781. (citing cases). In In re Marriage of Crow, this Court was faced with the question of when a civil contempt order is considered enforced. Id. The Court held that an order of commitment was sufficient to enforce a contempt order and, therefore, actual incarceration was not required to appeal. Id. The Court reasoned that, [i]n issuing an order of commitment, the trial court imposes the specific remedy incarceration. At this point, the contempt order changes from mere threat to `enforcement,' and becomes final and appealable. Id. at 781-82 (citing Rule 81.04(a); section 512.050, RSMo 2000). After this Court's decision in Crow, the court of appeals held that a stayed order of commitment is not final and appealable because the judgment in such a case is only a threat to enforcement. Eaton v. Bell, 127 S.W.3d 690, 698 (Mo.App.2004). This is true even when the stay has expired. Emmons v. Emmons, 310 S.W.3d 718, 724 (Mo.App.2010). In Emmons, the court held that if a warrant is stayed, the judgment will not be final and appealable until either (1) the contemnor is actually incarcerated on the stayed or conditioned warrant of commitment or (2) the trial court takes evidence to determine whether contempt has been purged and then reissues a warrant of commitment. Id. at 723. This Court adopts the Emmons rule of when a stayed contempt order is final and appealable. If either of these two things occur, the contemnor will have actual notice that the contempt order is enforceable and that incarceration is imminent. If incarceration occurs, the contemnor clearly knows that the judgment has been enforced. If the trial court takes evidenceconducts a hearing to see if the contempt has been purgedand finds that the contempt has not been purged and then reissues a warrant of commitment, the contemnor will have notice of the warrant of commitment by virtue of being present at the hearing. [3] Here, the January 12, 2010, warrant of commitment was stayed until 10 a.m. January 25, 2010. The warrant of commitment was actually issued on February 1, 2010. The judgment was not final at this time, however, because the court did not conduct a hearing to determine if Pamela had purged her contempt. Pamela filed her first notice of appeal on February 11, 2010. This notice properly was dismissed. While at a hearing on March 31, 2010, Pamela was served with the warrant and taken into custody. The contempt order was enforced and the judgment was appealable at that time because Pamela was actually incarcerated. Pamela's second notice of appeal was filed April 6, 2010. Rule 81.04(a) requires a notice of appeal to be filed no more than 10 days after a judgment becomes final. Pamela's notice of appeal was filed timely.