Peters-Riemers v. Riemers
Jenese A. Peters-Riemers, Plaintiff and Appellee
Roland C. Riemers, Defendant and Appellant
East Central Judicial District,
Judge Georgia Dawson
|Nature of Action:||Child Cust & Support (Div.\other)|
|Term:||11/2003  Argument: 11/26/2003|
|ND cite:||2004 ND 28|
674 N.W.2d 287
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
I. Did the Court err in law and/or fact and/or abuse its discretion by not following the correct legal procedure for contempt?
II. Did the Court err in law by ordering contempt as well as a money judgment?
III. Was Roland put in double jeopardy for the same repeated contempts?
IV. Did the Court err in law by shifting the burden of proof to Roland under NDCC 27-10-01.3(1)(a) in a proceedings that could result in jail?
V. Did the Court err in awarding attorney fees to Jenese?
VI. Did the Court abuse its discretion and violate Federal law for ordering Roland to pay more then 50% of his disposable income to Jenese?
VII. Did the Court violate state and federal prohibitions of imprisonment for debts and obligations as well as 42 USCS Section 1994 &/or 5526 by ordering Roland to be put in jail for failure to pay a past support obligation?
VIII. Did the Court err in law and abuse its discretion by not allowing a change of venue in a post divorce matter?
IX. Did the Court violate Roland's state and federal due process rights and state right to a remedy by using a contempt proceeding before the Court was able to first make a finding on his motion to amend support levels?
Appellant's Reply Brief Issues:
A. Did the district court follow the proper procedure for contempt as:
1. Did Roland have the right to appear both pro se and with counsel?
2. Was the Garaas Office required to withdraw from this matter?
3. Did Roland carry the "keys to his prison" to purge his contempt?
B. Did the district court properly order contempt as well as a money judgement for past support or:
1. Did the money judgment purge Roland's contempt?
2. Did the trial court properly included spousal support and attorney's fees in its money judgment?
3. Did the money judgment deprive Roland of his right to a remedy?
C. Does double jeopardy apply in civil contempt cases?
D. Did the trial court properly place the burden of proof on Roland regarding his inability to pay?
E. Did the trial court properly awarded attorney's fees in this action?
F. Did the trial court properly order Roland to pay his arrears?
G. Does Roland unconstitutionally face jail for failure to pay a "debt?"
H. Did the trial court lack jurisdiction to change venue in this matter?
I. Do Roland's remaining arguments lack merit?
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
The Appellant, Roland C. Riemers ("Roland)", presents nine (9) issues for review to this court. Many of these issues are repeated throughout the various sections of Roland's brief. For ease and continuity, Appellee, Jenese Peters-Riemers, ("Jenese"), will respond to Roland's issues in the same order.
|Add Docket 20030081 RSS|
|1||03/27/2003 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 03/26/2003|
|2||03/27/2003 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 03/26/2003|
|3||04/03/2003 Copy of letter dated 4-02-03 from Gail Wells, Ct. Reporter, to Mr. Riemers re advance payment|
|4||04/07/2003 MOTION FOR STAY OF DISTRICT COURT PROCEEDINGS BY PETERS-RIEMERS|
|5||04/09/2003 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (Motion for Stay). Denied|
|6||04/09/2003 Order Mailed to Parties|
|7||04/08/2003 EMERGENCY REQUEST FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR REMAND (Roland Riemers)|
|8||04/08/2003 E-FILED MOTION (via fax)|
|9||04/09/2003 Original Emergency Request for Stay Pending Appeal and Request for Remand|
|10||04/11/2003 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (Emergency Request for Stay and Remand). Denied|
|11||04/11/2003 Notice from Gail Wells that preparation of the transcript is suspended for failure to pay|
|12||04/17/2003 copy of letter dated 4/15/03 from Gail Wells to Mr. Riemers acknowledging advanced payment of TRA|
|13||05/14/2003 TRANSCRIPT DATED January 27, 2003|
|14||05/14/2003 DISK - TRA (1-27-03)|
|15||05/21/2003 RECORD ON APPEAL (12 vols.) (See Case No. 20020225)|
|16||05/21/2003 Supplemental Clerk's Certificate dated May 20, 2003 (Entries 1-77)|
|17||05/27/2003 Petition for Remand on Child Visitation|
|18||06/04/2003 Copies of motion pending in trial and court and order|
|19||06/09/2003 Clerk's Supplemental Cert. dated June 6, 2003, with entries 402-404 (78-80) attached|
|20||06/11/2003 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (Remand). Denied|
|21||06/11/2003 Order Mailed to Parties, trial judge, clerk|
|22||06/12/2003 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF|
|23||06/12/2003 ACTION BY CLERK (MAT). Granted: 07/23/2003|
|24||07/10/2003 Original and 2 copies each of transcripts dated 12/18/01 & 2/19/02|
|25||07/15/2003 RETURN OF ROA TO DIST. CT.|
|26||07/15/2003 Order of Return of Record Mailed to Parties|
|27||07/23/2003 APPELLANT BRIEF|
|28||07/23/2003 APPELLANT APPENDIX|
|29||07/24/2003 DISK - atb|
|30||08/21/2003 APPELLEE BRIEF|
|31||08/22/2003 DISK - aeb|
|32||08/22/2003 Application for Permission to Appear Pro Hac Vice of Jason W. McLean for Appellee; Affidavit|
|33||08/22/2003 of Jason W. McLean; and Affidavit of Michael L. Gjesdahl|
|34||08/22/2003 ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE. granted|
|35||09/06/2003 REPLY BRIEF of Appellant|
|36||09/12/2003 Corrected cover page, Table of Authorities, & Page 8 for ryb|
|37||09/12/2003 DISK - RYB|
|38||10/30/2003 RE-FILED RECORD ON APPEAL (16 VOLs), Exhibits & Transcripts (7) (Not rec'd: Exh.No.23-Book &|
|39||10/30/2003 No. 143-Gun from No. 198; Exh No. 1 - Pictures of Visits, etc. from #427)|
|40||11/26/2003 APPEARANCES: Roland C. Riemers; Jason W. McLean, Michael L. Gjesdahl|
|41||11/26/2003 ARGUED: Riemers; McLean (Vol. Y; Page 174)|
|42||11/26/2003 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|43||01/28/2004 DISPOSITION: REVERSED AND REMANDED|
|44||01/28/2004 UNANIMOUS OPINION: Maring, Mary Muehlen|
|45||01/28/2004 Costs on appeal taxed in favor of appellant|
|46||01/29/2004 Order/Judgment Mailed to Parties|
|47||02/11/2004 PETITION FOR REHEARING|
|48||02/12/2004 DISK - PER|
|49||02/25/2004 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT. Denied|
|51||03/10/2004 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|52||02/09/2010 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|