ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

SAM BIRD, JUDGE

DIVISION I

TERRELL BISHOP, JR.,

APPELLANT

V.

CONNIE HUBBARD BISHOP,

APPELLEE

CA00-843

MAY 2, 2001

APPEAL FROM THE YELL COUNTY CHANCERY COURT,

NO. E98-144,

HON. VAN B. TAYLOR,

CHANCERY JUDGE

AFFIRMED

This is an appeal from the Yell County Chancery Court, which found appellant Terrell Bishop, Jr. in contempt for failing to comply with the property-settlement agreement that he entered into with his ex-wife and appellee Connie Hubbard Bishop. The court found that Terrell had not complied with the terms of the property-settlement agreement by willfully refusing to pay spousal support to Connie, by failing to reimburse her for expenses she incurred while attending medical school, and by failing to furnish a vehicle to the parties' minor child. We affirm. Terrell and Connie were divorced by an order of the court in a decree that incorporated a property-settlement agreement. The agreement, which was drafted by Terrell's attorney, provided in part:

In lieu of regular child support and any claim of alimony, Husband shall cause his P.A. to pay Wife a salary of $4,500 per month or $5,000 a month if Wife is unemployed while completing the last two years of medical school and a year

of internship. This monthly obligation shall commence on January 1, 1999, and will continue until December 31, 2001. In the event Wife should quit medical school or fail to remain eligible during the aforesaid three year period the Husband shall pay the sum of $2,500.00 per month alimony and $500 per month child support said payment to commence upon the first day of the month following Wife's departure from medical school and ending on December 31, 2001.

The agreement also provided that Terrell would furnish the parties' minor child a car and would be responsible for the insurance payment on the car. And, the agreement provided that Terrell would be responsible for paying expenses to Connie, not to exceed $25,000 per year for a two-year period, while she was in medical school.

On August 18, 1999, Connie filed a petition asking the court to hold Terrell in contempt for willful nonpayment. She stated that Terrell had reduced unilaterally the amount he was paying her from $4,500 per month to $3,000 per month. In addition, she stated that he had failed to pay the expenses of her medical school, and she sought $25,000 for that year. A few months later, she filed an amended petition for contempt, stating that not only had he failed to pay her the monthly support and her school expenses pursuant to the property-settlement agreement, but that he had also failed to pay the monthly cost for their child's car payments.

At a hearing on February 1, 2000, Terrell represented himself and stated that his medical practice had filed for bankruptcy. Connie testified, stating that during their marriage Terrell had a lucrative medical practice as a neurologist in Pine Bluff with a taxable income of around $105,000. However, she said in October 1999, Terrell shut down that practice and was living in a rural area of Little Texas in southwest Yell County. She stated that he hadtold her that he was closing his office because he was tired of being a doctor. She stated that she did not believe the rural area in Yell County would support the practice of a neurologist.

She testified that she is currently a medical student at St. Johns' University in the Caribbean. She acknowledged that she had entered into a property-settlement agreement with Terrell in which he was to pay to her $4,500 a month in lieu of child support or any claim for alimony. She stated that she had not received that sum since June 1999 and that she was receiving only $3,000 per month. She stated that the checks had been coming from a variety of accounts. Connie stated that Terrell had never informed her as to why he unilaterally reduced the amount of the payments. She also stated that it was Terrell's responsibility under the property-settlement agreement to buy a car for their minor son and pay the insurance on it. However, she stated that Terrell had failed to do so and that she was making the payments. In addition, she stated that Terrell had failed to pay any of her medical-school expenses, as agreed to in the property-settlement agreement.

Connie also testified that Terrell had spent $20,000 for a credit-card payment, that he had deposited more than $100,000 in an account at Portland Bank, and that he had set up accounts in the Cayman Islands. She testified that Terrell, who was apparently involved in several lawsuits, had been setting up off-shore accounts in order to protect his assets from potential judgments. In addition, Connie stated that she was aware of several trips that Terrell had taken to the Cayman Islands, Ireland, and Reno, Nevada. In addition, Terrell had deeded 260 acres of farm property in Yell County to a trust.

Rychelle Hamblin, Terrell's office manager and bookkeeper for his medical practicein Pine Bluff, testified that Terrell had a very lucrative practice and averaged between $100,000 and $200,000 per year. She said that he ultimately decided that he did not want to be a doctor anymore, discouraged his patients from returning, and shut down his satellite clinics. She also testified that in 1999, she would write an $8,000 check every two weeks for deposit into a trust. She testified that she thought Terrell had several bank accounts and that he was transferring money into these accounts to keep the money out of the hands of creditors. She also testified that Terrell had incurred credit-card expenses in excess of $30,000.

The court found Terrell in contempt for failing to comply with the parties' property-settlement agreement, stating that he had willfully refused to pay spousal support to Connie, that he had failed to reimburse Connie for expenses that she incurred while attending medical school, and that he had failed to furnish a car to the parties' minor child. The court awarded a judgment against Terrell in favor of Connie for $37,969.94, and the court stated that the judgment should draw interest at the rate of 10% per annum. The court also found Terrell in contempt and ordered him committed to the Yell County Jail, but the court wrote in its order that "he may purge himself of said contempt by paying the sum of $13,000 to Plaintiff. That upon Defendant paying said sum of $13,000 he shall be released from incarceration."

Another hearing took place on February 8, at which time Terrell stated that he had two children to support and asked that the court release him from jail in order for him to work so that he could earn the money to pay the judgment. He stated that he was living oncredit cards and that he had transferred his retirement money in the amount of $91,000 to the Cayman Islands. The court agreed that he could be released after he posted $13,000 bond, which was the amount he testified that he had in assets in the Cayman Islands.

Terrell filed an appeal from the court's orders arising out of the February 1 and 8 hearings, contending that he should not have been found in contempt because he was not liable to Connie for the monthly support payments, but rather his medical practice, which filed for bankruptcy protection, was liable for the payment. He argues that there is nothing in the record to show that he did not attempt to cause his practice to perform just as he agreed he would do in the property-settlement agreement. He argues that the reason the chancellor found him in contempt was for "other reasons." He also argues that he was found in criminal contempt, rather than civil contempt.

This is not a criminal contempt proceeding, but a civil contempt proceeding. It is clear that the object of the proceeding was to coerce Terrell into paying what he owed Connie, not to punish him. See Hutchins v. Hutchins, 330 Ark. 426, 954 S.W.2d 249 (1997). Because this is a civil contempt proceeding, our standard of review is limited to examining the findings of the trial court, and the trial court's decision will not be reversed unless that decision is against the preponderance of the evidence. Burns v. First Nat'l Bank, 336 Ark. 406, 985 S.W.2d 747 (1998).

In the case at bar, the court found that Terrell was able to meet his obligations, but he had willfully failed to do so. This decision is not clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. Connie and Terrell's bookkeeper testified that he has various accounts withthousands of dollars in them, assets that could have been used to fulfill his obligations under the settlement agreement. In addition, he admitted to paying excessive credit-card bills rather than making the required payments pursuant to the property-settlement agreement.

We cannot say that the chancellor's finding that Terrell had failed to comply with the property-settlement agreement by willfully refusing to pay spousal support to Connie, by failing to reimburse her for expenses she incurred while attending medical school, and by failing to furnish a vehicle to the parties' minor child, was clearly against the preponderance of the evidence.

Affirmed.

Jennings and Griffen, JJ.,agree.