Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Moll finds that the lower court erred when it held the husband in contempt of certain child support orders because his actions, taken in October 2019, could not be used to prove a violation of the orders, which did not take effect until November 2019 after he was served with the documents. However, he was properly held in contempt for the purchase of a car because such a purchase was not a "customary and usual expense," considering the husband owned another vehicle at the time of the divorce. Affirmed.
To read this case, start your 14-day free trial.
Request a free trial account to get access to more case data, documents, and features.
To provide the best experiences, we and our partners use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us and our partners to process personal data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site and show (non-) personalized ads. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Click below to consent to the above or make granular choices. Your choices will be applied to this site only. You can change your settings at any time, including withdrawing your consent, by using the toggles on the Cookie Policy, or by clicking on the manage consent button at the bottom of the screen.