Family — contempt

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Civil

Family — contempt

Matthew Flannery and Natasha Henning share joint legal custody and physical placement of their minor child, G.R.F. Flannery filed motions alleging that Henning had denied him periods of physical placement with G.R.F. and that Henning had failed to follow a court order regarding physical placement of G.R.F. The circuit court denied Flannery’s motions, and Flannery now appeals.

On appeal, Flannery argues that the circuit court should have found Henning in contempt and granted him additional periods of physical placement and costs and attorneys fees because Henning: (1) intentionally violated a court-ordered placement schedule when she intentionally and unreasonably denied Flannery periods of physical placement with G.R.F.; and (2) “fail[ed] to appear in person” at an August 26, 2013 hearing. For the reasons set forth below, I reject Flannery’s arguments and affirm the circuit court’s order. This opinion will not be published.

2013AP2296 In re the Contempt Proceeding in re the Paternity of G.R.F.: Henning v. Flannery

Dist IV, Lafayette County, Johnston, J., Kloppenburg, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Russell, Nathan R., Shullsburg; For Respondent: Bartholf, Daniel R., Monroe