PART
VIII. GENERAL PROVISIONS
§571-81 Contempt of court. (a) Any
adult who wilfully violates, neglects, or refuses to obey or perform any lawful
order of the court may be proceeded against for contempt of court. Any adult
found in contempt of court may be punished as provided by law.
(b) When a court of
competent jurisdiction issues an order compelling a parent to furnish support,
including child support, medical support, or other remedial care, for the
parent's child, it shall constitute prima facie evidence of a civil contempt of
court upon proof that:
(1) The order was made, filed, and served on the
parent or proof that the parent was present in court at the time the order was
pronounced; and
(2) The parent did not comply with the order.
An order of civil contempt of court based on prima
facie evidence under this subsection shall clearly state that the failure to
comply with the order of civil contempt of court may subject the parent to a
penalty that may include imprisonment or, if imprisonment is immediately
ordered, the conditions that must be met for release from imprisonment. A
party may also prove civil contempt of court by means other than prima facie
evidence under this subsection. [L 1965, c 232, pt of §1; Supp, §333-36; HRS
§571-81; am L 2008, c 157, §1]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
3
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2023 · leading case:
In the Interest of Doe, 22 P.3d 987 (Haw. App. 1999).
In the Interest of Doe, 22 P.3d 987 (Haw. App. 1999).
· cites it 2× “9 An express contempt power is vested in the circuit and district family courts in HRS § 571-81 which relates to adults and states in part that “[a]ny adult who wilfully violates, neglects, or refuses to obey or perform any lawful order of the court may be proceeded against for…”
Rq v. Kq, 525 P.3d 707 (Haw. App. 2023).
· cites it 2× “For the same reason, we are unable to review Father's apparent argument that Mother and her counsel violated HRS § 571-81(a) and HRS § 710-1077(g) by acting "in contempt for" the Family Court's January 29, 2020 order dissolving a temporary restraining order in a separate case,…”
Doe v. Doe, 192 P.3d 612 (Haw. App. 2008).
· cites it 3× “" She argues that since the contempt order was essentially criminal, the family court violated HRS § 710-1077 without trying and charging her before issuing it. A district family court judge may "[e]nforce decrees and judgments and punish contempts according to law[.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 571-81(a) — 1 case
Rq v. Kq, 525 P.3d 707 (Haw. App. 2023).
“For the same reason, we are unable to review Father's apparent argument that Mother and her counsel violated HRS § 571-81(a) and HRS § 710-1077(g) by acting "in contempt for" the Family Court's January 29, 2020 order dissolving a temporary restraining order in a separate case,…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.