Preview:

RENDERED: JUNE 7, 2013; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
NO. 2012-CA-000181-MR LISA MARIE CHILTON APPELLANT

v.

APPEAL FROM SHELBY FAMILY COURT HONORABLE JOHN DAVID MYLES, JUDGE ACTION NO. 10-CI-00472

JAMES CARLISLE CHILTON

APPELLEE

OPINION AFFIRMING ** ** ** ** ** BEFORE: COMBS, STUMBO AND THOMPSON, JUDGES. THOMPSON, JUDGE: Lisa Marie Chilton appeals from an order finding her in contempt for failing to reimburse her former husband, James Carlisle Chilton, for the amount he was forced to pay a creditor for a debt assigned to Lisa, who filed for bankruptcy.

Lisa and James were married on December 26, 2003, and have two children. They were divorced by decree on April 15, 2011. Lisa and James had substantial debt and Lisa had a much lower salary than James. When the parties stipulated to the assignment of their debts, both knew Lisa planned to pursue a Chapter Seven bankruptcy. The family court assigned their debts in accordance with their stipulations. Lisa was assigned several debts, including a debt to Capital One Visa totaling approximately $9,000. The decree specified that the debts assigned to Lisa would be bankrupted and cannot be considered as support to Lisa. The Capital One Visa debt was accrued by both Lisa and James and both had a contractual obligation to Capital One. The divorce decree did not include any language that Lisa would hold James harmless in the event that any creditors pursued him after her discharge in bankruptcy. After the divorce was final, Lisa filed her bankruptcy action. James has not intervened in Lisa's bankruptcy action.1 Capital One pursued repayment from James and on September 29, 2011, James filed a motion for contempt with the family court seeking to enforce the divorce decree and make Lisa responsible for reimbursing him for any amounts he was forced to pay Capital One, pursuant to Howard v. Howard, 336 S.W.3d 433 (Ky. 2011).
1

While the family court's order indicates that Lisa discharged this debt in bankruptcy, the bankruptcy has not been completed according to her counsel, who indicated that the bankruptcy was not yet final, but creditors' actions against Lisa had been stayed.

-2-

Following a hearing, on November 7, 2011, the family court determined that Lisa's obligation to James under the decree was a separate obligation from her contractual obligation to Capital One. Accordingly, the family court determined that Lisa was responsible for this debt because it was assigned to her and found her in contempt. The family court explained that Lisa could purge the contempt order by paying James any amounts he was required to pay to Capital One on the Visa debt. This order contained appropriate finality language to make it immediately appealable. On November 7, 2011, Lisa filed a motion to alter, amend or vacate. While that motion was pending, Capital One and James reached an agreement that James's debt would be discharged by a lump sum payment of $6,000. James made this payment by obtaining a military loan. James sought reimbursement of this amount from Lisa, who refused to pay. On January 9, 2012, James filed another motion for contempt seeking reimbursement from Lisa in the amount of $209.26 per month and providing documentary support of his new loan obligation. On January 18, 2012, the family court orally declined to decide the second contempt motion and passed on it for thirty days. It then issued a written order denying Lisa's motion to alter, amend or vacate the order. This appeal followed. Kentucky courts have concurrent jurisdiction to construe a bankruptcy discharge and determine whether a particular debt is discharged or can be -3-

discharged. Howard, 336 S.W.3d at 442; Sunbeam Corp v. Dortch, 313 S.W.3d 114, 116-117 (Ky. 2010). 11 U.S.C.

Download 2011-ca-002138-mr.pdf

Kentucky Law