Brown v. Brown

The record is such that this may be considered an appeal from an interlocutory order for the payment of money, which gives us jurisdic tion. § 4-214, Burns’ 1933, § 1356, Baldwin’s 1934. The validity of the order is directly attacked by the first assignment of error. Incidentally it is collaterally attacked by a proceeding for indirect civil contempt. If appellee was not entitled to the order requiring appellant pendente lite to pay for her support and attorney fees, it should not be enforced for her benefit by appellant’s imprisonment which was ordered as a coercive measure and not to uphold…