Hipschman v. Cochran

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that cases involving future payment of future obligations “are not analogous to the situation where incarceration is ordered for non-compliance with past, accrued and unpaid support obligations—i.e., arrearages”
• holding courts must hold pre-incarceration hearings where previous contempt orders required extrajudicial compliance
• noting that “[njeither constitutional principle, nor rule of procedure, nor common sense impose the requirement of an additional pre-in-carceration hearing on a busy trial court to reconsider fact issues already determined”
• “There must be a hearing before incarceration, where a con-temnor may challenge the allegation of noncompliance and defend on the ground that he does not have the present ability to pay....”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).