Court Opinion

ID: 7874724
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-08 21:03:45.986333+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:31:21.564582
License: Public Domain

FOSHEIM, Chief Justice
(dissenting).
Precedent holds that findings of fact and conclusions of law must be entered in contempt proceedings. In Otten v. Otten, 245 N.W.2d 506 (S.D.1976), we held:
Findings of fact are necessary before a judgment of contempt may be entered against a defendant ... These findings may be incorporated in the judgment, ... but the bald statement in the instant judgment that defendant “ * * * is hereby found to be in contempt of this Court,” is in the nature of a conclusion rather than a finding based upon eviden-tiary facts and does not satisfy the requirement that the court must make findings of fact that show, as a matter of law, a basis for the judgment.
An absence of findings and conclusions likewise frustrates review of whether the trial court properly denied appellant’s attempt to have appellee found in contempt. I would accordingly remand for entry of appropriate findings.
I am hereby authorized to state that Justice HENDERSON joins in this dissent.