Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

241 N.C. 73

84 S.E.2d 328

Jarrell v. Jarrell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 3, 1954

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1954-11-03

Relies on Vaughan v. Vaughan · West v. . West · Smithwick v. . Smithwick

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1954-11-03

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently April 1999

8 state decisions

4019541960197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1 There is competent evidence in the Record to support His Honor’s findings of fact that the respondent acted in good faith in reducing his payments to $50.00 a month since Lorena Jarrell’s marriage, and in not making a payment of $50.00 a month while Roger Lee Jarrell was living with him, and that on that basis he is only $35.00 in arrears, which he is now ready to pay. Such findings of fact support His Honor’s conclusion that respondent has shown sufficient cause why he should not be held in wilful contempt of court. To constitute contempt the violation of the order to pay money for support of children must be wilful. West v. West, 199 N.C. 12, 153 S.E. 600; Vaughan v. Vaughan, 213 N.C. 189, *75195 S.E. 351; Smithwick v. Smithwick, 218 N.C. 503, 11 S.E. 2d 455. Judge Hall was correct in ruling tbat tbe evidence failed to show a wilful contempt.

¶2 Affirmed.

/241/nc/73 · .json · Public domain