Pierce v. Pierce

LaROSE, Judge.

Jay Pierce appeals an order holding him in civil contempt for failure to pay alimony to his former wife.

Mr. Pierce argues that the trial court erroneously denied his motion to continue so that the trial court could hear his supplemental petition to modify alimony together with the contempt motion. We find no error. Even if the trial court had considered the two motions simultaneously, it could not have reduced the alimony due prior to the filing of the supplemental petition. See Ray v. Ray, 707 So.2d 358, 360 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).

Mr. Pierce also argues that the contempt order is…