¶1*621The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiffs motion to hold the husband in contempt for the willful violation of an order dated July 30, 2008. The defendant’s failure to comply with the order was not willful, since the plaintiffs actions prevented him from complying.
¶2The plaintiffs remaining contention is without merit. Skelos, J.E, Eng, Leventhal and Chambers, JJ., concur.