When is a Civil Contempt fine more than a fine?
In a brand new opinion from the Court of Appeals, a “creative” order from a District Court Judge was given a stamp of approval.
The defendant in Tyll v. Berry was told to have no contact with the plaintiff or the plaintiff’s family for a year. It appears the Defendant had a tough time paying attention to the calendar because after one month, he was at it again sending harassing emails, only this time to a more distant branch of the plaintiff’s family tree.
The Judge accessed a contempt fine against the Defendant, but added the requirement that the payment be made NOT to the Clerk of Court, but to THE PLAINTIFF. Typically, damages are not awarded to a party for the other party’s contempt but fines are not unusual at all. Here the fine is just ordered to be paid to the Plaintiff.
You can READ MORE in North Carolina Lawyers Weekly.
About Mike
Mike Daisley is a civil litigation attorney and Certified Mediator in Charlotte, North Carolina, and owner and president of "DaisleyLegal" a virtual law firm focused on helping victims of drunk driving injuries and other careless individuals and corporations. He devotes a significant time of his practice as a mediator in North Carolina's Superior Courts, using his 35 years of litigation experience to counsel and assist opposing parties to resolve their disputes and lawsuits cooperatively, avoiding the high expenses and time commitments involved in going to trial.
In addition to his commitment to Civil Trial Advocacy and Alternative Dispute Resolution, Mike is also an avid writer, and has a wide array of interests outside of his legal practice, including stints as a columnist for The Charlotte Observer, political analyst for WCNC-TV and WBT Radio. Mike’s biggest passion outside the law is learning and writing about theology, and especially the role doubt plays in faith, the role faith plays (or should play) in politics, and (as he puts it) the “beauty and deep mystery” of the liturgy.
Mike is a lifelong Episcopalian, and often jokes that means "I am a raging agnostic at least two or three days a week.” In 2019, he was appointed by the Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of North Carolina as a licensed Lay Preacher in the Episcopal Church.
(A sample of Mike’s preaching can be heard here: http://www.stmartins-charlotte.org/content.cfm?id=2245&download_id=269#attached_content)
To discuss the possibility of teaching, lecture, sermon or interview requests (or to make any comments or suggestions about the “WithGladness” blog) you may contact Mike at any
Office email : Mike@DaisleyLegal.com
Personal email: MikeDaisley@outlook.com
Office voicemail: (704) 554-2306
Mike Daisley & Associates, LLC
1515 Mockingbird Lane, Suite 400
Charlotte, North Carolina 28209
NCLegalTrends.com from DaisleyLaw, PLLC 
“The defendant in Tyll v. Berry was told to have no contact with the plaintiff or the plaintiff’s family for a year. It appears the Defendant had a tough time paying attention to the calendar because after one month, he was at it again sending harassing emails, only this time to a more distant branch of the plaintiff’s family tree.”
Your statement contains two errors:
1. I was told to have no contact with Plaintiffs (and separately to not harass Plaintiffs’ family).
2. I sent one email with clear legal purpose to my mother-in-law who was not a Plaintiff.
Sincerely,
Joey Berry
P.S. Here is the entire email (effectively ratified by the NC Court of Appeals as a standard for harassment):
Please stop harassing us. You, David and Jenny have gotten a court
order severing Michelle (and me) from your family for at least eleven
more months. Your attempts to call us are torturous to Michelle.
Under no circumstance is any form of communication welcome to
either Michelle or me.
-Joey
[COA13-512 – ROA pg 66.]
*appeal planned to SCOTUS; underlying orders to SCOTUS conference October 31,2014.
[http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/14-6022.htm]
Thanks for reading the blog, Mr. Berry, and for the collaboration/correction.
-mcd