Opinion ID: 466263
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Civil Contempt as Compensation

Text: 30 Similarly, we find that the sanctions cannot be defended as compensation to the Trustee for any losses attributable to the contemptuous behavior. Compensatory civil contempt reimburses the injured party for losses and expenses incurred because of the contemptuous conduct. This includes losses attributable to the violation and expenses reasonably and necessarily incurred in the attempt to enforce compliance. 16 The contempt sanctions imposed on Hicks, however, required reimbursement of expenses wholly unrelated to the violation found in this case: 31 Dr. Hicks shall reimburse Trustee for his time expended in the myriad of court hearings and preparations of these hearings, in order to enforce the Court Order of December 7, 1983. Trustee shall be required to provide his statement of time and expenses to this Court and the Court will then enter a separate order quantifying an award to Trustee, that shall be then paid by Florence Hicks, within such time as the court orders in its order awarding fees. 32 On its face, it is plain that the order proposes to reimburse the Trustee for expenses unrelated to Hicks' failure to receive written approval before listing. While only one hearing was devoted to this violation, the contempt order required Hicks to reimburse for the myriad of court hearings and preparations of these hearings to enforce the December 7, 1983 order without regard to whether the myriad hearings and preparations were related to the specific violation found by the bankruptcy court. Even the one hearing held with respect to the listing was originally intended to cover several alleged violations ultimately not even addressed by the bankruptcy court. Moreover, we strongly doubt whether any such expense was necessarily incurred to enforce the December 7, 1983 order. Once the Trustee discovered the existence of the listing agreement, there was no need to use a contempt proceeding to renegotiate a more acceptable listing agreement. In fact, the Trustee himself did not even request a contempt proceeding; instead, the bankruptcy court sua sponte ordered the show cause hearing on several issues--including the listing agreement. Furthermore, even before the contempt order issued, the Trustee was able to negotiate a satisfactory listing agreement with the same broker previously chosen by Hicks. 33 On this record, we cannot possibly find that the contempt order was crafted to compensate the complainant for losses sustained. 17 Indeed, we cannot even find that the Trustee sought compensation for the alleged violation of the court's December 7, 1983 order. 18 A fine imposed by the court in the absence of a motion by the party in interest would transmute the proceeding into a punitive one for criminal contempt.... The effective waiver of the complainant's interest removes the legal basis for imposition of civil contempt. 19 34