Legal Opinion

Pugh v. Pugh

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 1984No. 83-1861PublishedCited by 68 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Patton J.

I

Appellant’s propositions of law one and two are related and will be discussed together. In his first proposition, appellant contends that in a contempt proceeding, the appellee has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the appellant purposely failed to comply with the terms of the divorce decree. In his second proposition of law, appellant contends that in determining whether he purposely failed to comply with the divorce decree, his inability to comply with the decree is not an affirmative defense but an issue of evidence. These contentions are without merit.

Wi…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. McComb v. Jacksonville Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Brown v. Executive 200, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Windham Bank v. TomaszczykOhio Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Zakany v. ZakanyOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Holloway v. HollowayOhio Supreme Court · 1935

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by68 opinions

  1. Gibson v. Gibson (In Re Gibson)Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit · 1998
  2. Carroll v. DettyOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
  3. In Re CarrollOhio Court of Appeals · 1985
  4. Arthur Young & Co. v. KellyOhio Court of Appeals · 1990
  5. In Re Marriage of Cyr and KayColorado Court of Appeals · 2008

63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API