This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

A judgment of dissolution filed on March 17, 1992, ordered D to pay $438 a month to support his two children. That order was modified in November 1994 to $385 per month. No payments were made from July 1994 through June 1995. A total of $5,210 was due and unpaid. D was unemployed when the order was made. The order was based on his ability to make $1,671 gross income per month. Contempt was issued, and D was put under an order to show cause and D was served and directed to appear and show why he was not guilty of contempt. Testimony was that D was basically unemployed. When asked if he was getting a job his reply was that he was trying. D's counsel thought that once D raised the defense of inability to comply the burden of proof was on Ortiz (P) to show D had the ability to comply beyond a reasonable doubt and that in compelling D to work under threat of punishment constituted involuntary servitude. P's counsel argued that D had the burden of proof. The court ruled for P and found that D was capable of work. D was found guilty of contempt. The only factual finding was that D had the ability to work. D appealed and the Court of Appeals ruled for D as forcing him to work would be involuntary servitude. This appeal resulted.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.