Court Opinion

ID: 9623705
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 06:41:02.789548+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:05:33.988969
License: Public Domain

SWANSTROM, J.,
concurring specially.
*541The parties to this appeal have long since cut their ties with the State of Idaho. Except for this appeal they have chosen to litigate their more recent disputes in another state far removed from Idaho. I would suggest that — notwithstanding the remand in Jones — we should not feel constrained to remand for the purpose of relitigating the question of a six-year-old contempt, nor should the trial court view our remand as a mandate to reconsider the question. The husband had one fair opportunity to make a case for contempt. I cannot see where the substantial rights of either party would now be affected adversely if the trial judge should decide not to entertain further litigation on this issue.