Court Opinion

ID: 9509676
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:48:46.527596+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:51.886376
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE GRAY,
specially concurring.
I concur in most of the Court’s opinion, but not in that portion which addresses Gregory’s responsibility for part of Scott’s tutoring expenses. Notwithstanding, I join in the results reached by the Court.
With regard to the expenses for tutoring Scott, the decree and agreement require Karen and Gregory to share the expense of “all private school tuition incurred by the minor children.” Tutoring expenses are not school tuition. Thus, it is my view that Gregory is not responsible for any portion of the tutoring expense and did not violate the decree by refusing to pay a portion of that expense.
Nevertheless, it is clear that Gregory violated the decree and agreement in a number of ways. Therefore, I join in the Court’s remand for further proceedings on Karen’s motion for contempt.