A 2025 Florida appellate decision, Robilotta v. Karkhoff, shines a bright light on the extreme, high-stakes, and procedurally complex world of post-divorce enforcement. The case provides a critical lesson on the profound differences between civil contempt and criminal contempt, and it delivers a crucial, if technical, ruling on what a court can and cannot do when it finds a party in criminal contempt.
The case involved a Former Husband who, after a Final Judgment, repeatedly failed to pay his share of his child’s uncovered medical expenses. After two prior findings of civil contempt failed to secure his compliance, the Former Wife escalated the matter by filing a motion for indirect criminal contempt. The trial court found the Former Husband guilty on eight counts and sentenced him to probation. As part of that probation, the court ordered him to pay $100 in “prosecution costs” and to pay the Former Wife’s attorney’s fees as restitution.
The appellate court reversed the order for prosecution costs, ruling that such costs are only authorized when the State Attorney prosecutes a case, not a private attorney. More importantly, the court dismissed the appeal on the attorney’s fees as “premature” because the final amount had not yet been set. However, the court’s written opinion strongly signaled that awarding a private party’s attorney’s fees as restitution in a criminal contempt case is not authorized under Florida law, citing a string of similar cases. This case is a vital study for any Tampa divorce lawyer and their clients on the risks, rewards, and technical traps of contempt proceedings.
The Core Problem: When a Final Judgment is Ignored
In Tampa and across Hillsborough County, one of the most frustrating experiences a person can have is “winning” their divorce, only to find that the other party refuses to follow the final judgment. A final judgment of dissolution of marriage is not a suggestion; it is a direct, legally binding court order. When that order requires one party to pay child support, alimony, or, as in this case, a share of uncovered medical expenses, their failure to do so is a direct violation of the court’s authority.
The initial steps for enforcement are often handled by a Tampa divorce lawyer through motions to compel and, most commonly, a motion for civil contempt. But what happens when that fails? The Robilotta case shows what happens when a party is so frustrated with non-compliance that they move on to the “nuclear option” of enforcement: indirect criminal contempt.
To understand the Robilotta decision, one must first understand the fundamental differences between these two powerful, and very different, legal tools.
The Two Hammers of Enforcement: Civil vs. Criminal Contempt
When a party in Tampa violates a family law court order, the other party has two primary forms of contempt they can pursue. A knowledgeable Tampa divorce lawyer must explain the significant differences in their purpose, their process, and their potential outcomes.
Civil Contempt: The “Keys to the Jail”
This is the most common form of enforcement in family law. Its purpose is not to punish; its purpose is to coercecompliance. The entire proceeding is designed to get the non-paying party to follow the order.
- The Goal: To get the money paid or the action (like selling a house) completed.
- The Process: A party files a Motion for Civil Contempt. At the hearing, the moving party must prove (1) there was a clear court order, and (2) the other party failed to comply with it.
- The Burden of Proof: Once non-payment is established, the burden shifts to the non-paying party. They must prove that their failure to pay was not willful. The only true defense is an inability to pay.
- The Sanction: If the court finds the party in civil contempt, it will not sentence them to jail. Instead, it will set a “purge” amount. This is a specific dollar amount that the party must pay, by a specific date, to “purge” themselves of the contempt.
- The Coercion: The court’s “hammer” is that it can order the person to be incarcerated until they pay the purge. This is why civil contempt is often called the “keys to the jail.” The contemnor is not serving a “sentence”; they are being held until they choose to comply. If they have the ability to pay, they can walk out at any time.
- Attorney’s Fees: Critically, Florida’s statutes expressly allow a court to award attorney’s fees and costs to the prevailing party in a civil contempt enforcement action. This is the standard, expected, and proper way to get your fees paid for having to drag your ex-spouse back to court.
In Robilotta, the Former Wife had already done this twice. The civil contempt findings were apparently not a strong enough motivator. She was still not being paid. This is what led her to escalate the fight.
Indirect Criminal Contempt: The “Punishment”
Criminal contempt is an entirely different legal animal. Its purpose is not to coerce payment; its purpose is to punish the person for their willful and intentional defiance of a court’s authority. It is a legal statement that the past act of disobedience was an offense against the dignity of the court itself.
- The Goal: To punish past, willful defiance.
- The Process: This is a criminal proceeding. The accused party is afforded many of the same constitutional protections as any other criminal defendant. They have the right to remain silent, the right to an attorney (and to have one appointed if they cannot afford one), and the right to a formal trial.
- The Burden of Proof: The burden of proof is much higher. The moving party (or the prosecutor) must prove the accused is guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.” This is the same standard used for a murder trial, and it is vastly higher than the “preponderance of the evidence” standard in civil contempt.
- The Sanction: The sanction is punitive. It is a fixed sentence, such as a specific number of days in jail or a term of probation. This is not coercive; the person cannot “pay their way out.” They must serve the sentence as a punishment for their past bad acts. In Robilotta, the Former Husband was sentenced to six months of probation.
- Attorney’s Fees: This is the central issue of the Robilotta appeal. Unlike civil contempt, there is no broad, clear statute that allows a private party to recover their attorney’s fees in a criminal contempt proceeding.
This is the strategic choice a Tampa divorce lawyer must present to a client who is owed money. Do you want to pursue civil contempt, which is designed to get you paid and recover your legal fees? Or, if that has failed, are you so frustrated that you want to punish the other party, knowing that in doing so, you are likely forfeiting your right to have your attorney’s fees paid for that specific action?
The Former Wife in Robilotta tried to do both. She wanted the criminal punishment and wanted her attorney’s fees paid. The appellate court’s decision signals this is not allowed.
The Robilotta Rulings: A Technical Takedown of the Sentence
The appellate court reviewed the two financial penalties the trial court imposed as part of the Former Husband’s criminal probation: “prosecution costs” and “restitution.”
1. The “Prosecution Costs” Were Reversed
The trial court ordered the Defendant to pay $100 in “prosecution costs.” This may seem like a minor point, but it reveals a deep legal error. The appellate court reversed this part of the order.
The court’s reasoning was simple:
- The Florida statute that authorizes “prosecution costs” (section 938.27) is specifically designed to reimburse the State of Florida.
- These costs are meant to compensate the State Attorney’s office for the expense of prosecuting a case on behalf of the public.
- In the Robilotta case, the State Attorney was not involved. The trial court had appointed the Former Wife’s private attorney to “assist the Court in the prosecution.”
- Because the state did not prosecute and did not incur any costs, the trial court had no statutory authority to levy these specific costs.
This is a technical, but crucial, distinction. It shows that in family law, every single dollar a court orders a party to pay must be authorized by a specific statute or rule. A Tampa divorce lawyer must be able to identify when a court has exceeded its authority, even by as little as $100.
2. The “Restitution” Was a Fatal Legal Error (But the Appeal was Premature)
This is the most significant part of the case and the biggest lesson for anyone in Tampa facing an enforcement battle. The trial court ordered the Former Husband to pay the Former Wife’s legal fees as restitution.
In a normal criminal case, restitution is for the victim. It is designed to make them whole for the direct financial damagesthey suffered as a result of the crime. For example, a court orders a burglar to pay restitution for the value of the property they stole, or an attacker to pay for their victim’s medical bills.
The Former Wife’s attorney argued that her legal fees were “damages” she suffered in having to bring the criminal contempt case. The appellate court, in its analysis, strongly disagreed.
While the court did not get to formally reverse this order (for reasons we will explain), it agreed with the Defendant’s legal argument. Citing a string of other Florida cases (Burlinson, Kaplan, Dowis), the appellate court confirmed the established law:
It is not authorized to award a private party’s attorney’s fees as “restitution” in an indirect criminal contempt proceeding.
The courts have found that allowing this “improperly skews the decision making process.” It mixes the civil remedy of attorney’s fees with the criminal penalty of restitution.
This is the key takeaway: If you are the party owed money, your Tampa divorce lawyer will likely advise you to stick to civil contempt, where you can get a “purge” and a “judgment for attorney’s fees.” If you choose to escalate to criminalcontempt, you are making a strategic choice to seek punishment, and in doing so, you are likely giving up your ability to have your fees paid for that specific action.
The Final Twist: A Lesson in Appellate Procedure
If the appellate court agreed that the restitution order was illegal, why did it not reverse it? This is the final, technical, and frustrating lesson of the Robilotta case.
The appellate court dismissed this part of the appeal. It did not rule on the merits because it did not have jurisdiction to do so. The appeal was “premature.”
Here is why:
- At the conclusion of the trial, the judge ordered the Defendant to pay the fees as restitution, but the order stated that the final amount of those fees would be “determined at a later time.”
- This is known as “reserving jurisdiction.” The order established the entitlement to fees but did not set the amount.
- In Florida, an appeal can only be taken from a “final, appealable order.” An order that establishes an entitlement to fees but reserves on the amount is not a final order.
- The Defendant, by filing his appeal before the court held the second hearing and set the final dollar amount, appealed too soon.
This is a procedural trap that can be devastating for litigants. The Defendant’s Tampa divorce lawyer in this case made a 100% correct legal argument, which the appellate court even agreed with in its opinion. But because the appeal was filed at the wrong time, the court was powerless to fix the error.
What happens now? The case goes back to the trial court. The trial judge will likely hold a hearing to set the amount of fees (e.g., “$10,000”). The Defendant will then have to file a new appeal of that order, at which point the appellate court (armed with its own prior opinion) will almost certainly reverse it.
This is a perfect example of how complex, technical, and unforgiving the legal system can be. It is not a place for “do-it-yourself” legal work. A single procedural misstep can cost a party years of time and thousands of dollars, even when the law is on their side.
Conclusion: Enforcement is Not a Simple Matter
The Robilotta case is a powerful illustration of the consequences that flow from a single, willful violation of a final judgment. It demonstrates that the law provides multiple “hammers” for enforcement, but that each hammer comes with its own complex set of rules, burdens, and financial consequences.
Whether you are a Tampa resident who is owed unpaid child support, medical expenses, or alimony, or you are the party being accused of non-payment, this case proves that the stakes are incredibly high. The distinction between civil and criminal contempt, the rules on attorney’s fees, and the rigid procedures for appeals are not just “legal jargon”; they are the rules of a high-stakes game that can result in probation, incarceration, and significant financial liability.
Navigating the enforcement of a Tampa divorce decree requires a Tampa divorce lawyer who understands these complex and different paths. A skilled attorney can analyze your specific situation and advise you on the most effective (and cost-effective) strategy to achieve your goals, whether that is to get paid or to defend yourself against an unjust accusation.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What is the difference between civil contempt and criminal contempt? Civil contempt is coercive—its goal is to make a person comply with a court order (e.g., pay the money). Criminal contempt is punitive—its goal is to punish a person for their past, willful defiance of a court order.
What are “uncovered medical expenses”? This is a form of child support. It refers to the portion of a child’s medical, dental, or prescription bills that are not covered by insurance. A final judgment will almost always specify the percentage each parent is responsible for paying.
Can I get my attorney’s fees paid if I file for contempt? In a civil contempt case, Florida law absolutely allows the court to award attorney’s fees to the prevailing party. However, as the Robilotta case shows, courts have ruled that you cannot get your private attorney’s fees paid as “restitution” in a criminal contempt case.
Why did the court reverse the “prosecution costs”? The $100 in prosecution costs was reversed because that specific statute is designed to reimburse the State Attorney’s office. Because the state was not involved and a private attorney prosecuted the case, the court had no authority to order it.
What does it mean for an appeal to be “premature”? An appeal can only be filed from a “final order.” In this case, the trial court’s order only reserved jurisdiction to set the amount of attorney’s fees. Because no final dollar amount was set, the order was not “final,” and the appeal was filed too early, or “prematurely.”
The McKinney Law Group: Experienced Divorce Attorneys Serving Tampa Clients
We guide clients through all aspects of divorce—from asset division and custody to support agreements—with clear legal strategies and personalized attention.
Call 813-428-3400 or email [email protected] to schedule your consultation.
A 2025 Florida appellate decision, Robilotta v. Karkhoff, shines a bright light on the extreme, high-stakes, and procedurally complex world of post-divorce enforcement. The case provides a critical lesson on the profound differences between civil contempt and criminal contempt, and it delivers a crucial, if technical, ruling on what a court can and cannot do when it finds a party in criminal contempt.
The case involved a Former Husband who, after a Final Judgment, repeatedly failed to pay his share of his child’s uncovered medical expenses. After two prior findings of civil contempt failed to secure his compliance, the Former Wife escalated the matter by filing a motion for indirect criminal contempt. The trial court found the Former Husband guilty on eight counts and sentenced him to probation. As part of that probation, the court ordered him to pay $100 in “prosecution costs” and to pay the Former Wife’s attorney’s fees as restitution.
The appellate court reversed the order for prosecution costs, ruling that such costs are only authorized when the State Attorney prosecutes a case, not a private attorney. More importantly, the court dismissed the appeal on the attorney’s fees as “premature” because the final amount had not yet been set. However, the court’s written opinion strongly signaled that awarding a private party’s attorney’s fees as restitution in a criminal contempt case is not authorized under Florida law, citing a string of similar cases. This case is a vital study for any Tampa divorce lawyer and their clients on the risks, rewards, and technical traps of contempt proceedings.
The Core Problem: When a Final Judgment is Ignored
In Tampa and across Hillsborough County, one of the most frustrating experiences a person can have is “winning” their divorce, only to find that the other party refuses to follow the final judgment. A final judgment of dissolution of marriage is not a suggestion; it is a direct, legally binding court order. When that order requires one party to pay child support, alimony, or, as in this case, a share of uncovered medical expenses, their failure to do so is a direct violation of the court’s authority.
The initial steps for enforcement are often handled by a Tampa divorce lawyer through motions to compel and, most commonly, a motion for civil contempt. But what happens when that fails? The Robilotta case shows what happens when a party is so frustrated with non-compliance that they move on to the “nuclear option” of enforcement: indirect criminal contempt.
To understand the Robilotta decision, one must first understand the fundamental differences between these two powerful, and very different, legal tools.
The Two Hammers of Enforcement: Civil vs. Criminal Contempt
When a party in Tampa violates a family law court order, the other party has two primary forms of contempt they can pursue. A knowledgeable Tampa divorce lawyer must explain the significant differences in their purpose, their process, and their potential outcomes.
Civil Contempt: The “Keys to the Jail”
This is the most common form of enforcement in family law. Its purpose is not to punish; its purpose is to coercecompliance. The entire proceeding is designed to get the non-paying party to follow the order.
- The Goal: To get the money paid or the action (like selling a house) completed.
- The Process: A party files a Motion for Civil Contempt. At the hearing, the moving party must prove (1) there was a clear court order, and (2) the other party failed to comply with it.
- The Burden of Proof: Once non-payment is established, the burden shifts to the non-paying party. They must prove that their failure to pay was not willful. The only true defense is an inability to pay.
- The Sanction: If the court finds the party in civil contempt, it will not sentence them to jail. Instead, it will set a “purge” amount. This is a specific dollar amount that the party must pay, by a specific date, to “purge” themselves of the contempt.
- The Coercion: The court’s “hammer” is that it can order the person to be incarcerated until they pay the purge. This is why civil contempt is often called the “keys to the jail.” The contemnor is not serving a “sentence”; they are being held until they choose to comply. If they have the ability to pay, they can walk out at any time.
- Attorney’s Fees: Critically, Florida’s statutes expressly allow a court to award attorney’s fees and costs to the prevailing party in a civil contempt enforcement action. This is the standard, expected, and proper way to get your fees paid for having to drag your ex-spouse back to court.
In Robilotta, the Former Wife had already done this twice. The civil contempt findings were apparently not a strong enough motivator. She was still not being paid. This is what led her to escalate the fight.
Indirect Criminal Contempt: The “Punishment”
Criminal contempt is an entirely different legal animal. Its purpose is not to coerce payment; its purpose is to punish the person for their willful and intentional defiance of a court’s authority. It is a legal statement that the past act of disobedience was an offense against the dignity of the court itself.
- The Goal: To punish past, willful defiance.
- The Process: This is a criminal proceeding. The accused party is afforded many of the same constitutional protections as any other criminal defendant. They have the right to remain silent, the right to an attorney (and to have one appointed if they cannot afford one), and the right to a formal trial.
- The Burden of Proof: The burden of proof is much higher. The moving party (or the prosecutor) must prove the accused is guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.” This is the same standard used for a murder trial, and it is vastly higher than the “preponderance of the evidence” standard in civil contempt.
- The Sanction: The sanction is punitive. It is a fixed sentence, such as a specific number of days in jail or a term of probation. This is not coercive; the person cannot “pay their way out.” They must serve the sentence as a punishment for their past bad acts. In Robilotta, the Former Husband was sentenced to six months of probation.
- Attorney’s Fees: This is the central issue of the Robilotta appeal. Unlike civil contempt, there is no broad, clear statute that allows a private party to recover their attorney’s fees in a criminal contempt proceeding.
This is the strategic choice a Tampa divorce lawyer must present to a client who is owed money. Do you want to pursue civil contempt, which is designed to get you paid and recover your legal fees? Or, if that has failed, are you so frustrated that you want to punish the other party, knowing that in doing so, you are likely forfeiting your right to have your attorney’s fees paid for that specific action?
The Former Wife in Robilotta tried to do both. She wanted the criminal punishment and wanted her attorney’s fees paid. The appellate court’s decision signals this is not allowed.
The Robilotta Rulings: A Technical Takedown of the Sentence
The appellate court reviewed the two financial penalties the trial court imposed as part of the Former Husband’s criminal probation: “prosecution costs” and “restitution.”
1. The “Prosecution Costs” Were Reversed
The trial court ordered the Defendant to pay $100 in “prosecution costs.” This may seem like a minor point, but it reveals a deep legal error. The appellate court reversed this part of the order.
The court’s reasoning was simple:
- The Florida statute that authorizes “prosecution costs” (section 938.27) is specifically designed to reimburse the State of Florida.
- These costs are meant to compensate the State Attorney’s office for the expense of prosecuting a case on behalf of the public.
- In the Robilotta case, the State Attorney was not involved. The trial court had appointed the Former Wife’s private attorney to “assist the Court in the prosecution.”
- Because the state did not prosecute and did not incur any costs, the trial court had no statutory authority to levy these specific costs.
This is a technical, but crucial, distinction. It shows that in family law, every single dollar a court orders a party to pay must be authorized by a specific statute or rule. A Tampa divorce lawyer must be able to identify when a court has exceeded its authority, even by as little as $100.
2. The “Restitution” Was a Fatal Legal Error (But the Appeal was Premature)
This is the most significant part of the case and the biggest lesson for anyone in Tampa facing an enforcement battle. The trial court ordered the Former Husband to pay the Former Wife’s legal fees as restitution.
In a normal criminal case, restitution is for the victim. It is designed to make them whole for the direct financial damagesthey suffered as a result of the crime. For example, a court orders a burglar to pay restitution for the value of the property they stole, or an attacker to pay for their victim’s medical bills.
The Former Wife’s attorney argued that her legal fees were “damages” she suffered in having to bring the criminal contempt case. The appellate court, in its analysis, strongly disagreed.
While the court did not get to formally reverse this order (for reasons we will explain), it agreed with the Defendant’s legal argument. Citing a string of other Florida cases (Burlinson, Kaplan, Dowis), the appellate court confirmed the established law:
It is not authorized to award a private party’s attorney’s fees as “restitution” in an indirect criminal contempt proceeding.
The courts have found that allowing this “improperly skews the decision making process.” It mixes the civil remedy of attorney’s fees with the criminal penalty of restitution.
This is the key takeaway: If you are the party owed money, your Tampa divorce lawyer will likely advise you to stick to civil contempt, where you can get a “purge” and a “judgment for attorney’s fees.” If you choose to escalate to criminalcontempt, you are making a strategic choice to seek punishment, and in doing so, you are likely giving up your ability to have your fees paid for that specific action.
The Final Twist: A Lesson in Appellate Procedure
If the appellate court agreed that the restitution order was illegal, why did it not reverse it? This is the final, technical, and frustrating lesson of the Robilotta case.
The appellate court dismissed this part of the appeal. It did not rule on the merits because it did not have jurisdiction to do so. The appeal was “premature.”
Here is why:
- At the conclusion of the trial, the judge ordered the Defendant to pay the fees as restitution, but the order stated that the final amount of those fees would be “determined at a later time.”
- This is known as “reserving jurisdiction.” The order established the entitlement to fees but did not set the amount.
- In Florida, an appeal can only be taken from a “final, appealable order.” An order that establishes an entitlement to fees but reserves on the amount is not a final order.
- The Defendant, by filing his appeal before the court held the second hearing and set the final dollar amount, appealed too soon.
This is a procedural trap that can be devastating for litigants. The Defendant’s Tampa divorce lawyer in this case made a 100% correct legal argument, which the appellate court even agreed with in its opinion. But because the appeal was filed at the wrong time, the court was powerless to fix the error.
What happens now? The case goes back to the trial court. The trial judge will likely hold a hearing to set the amount of fees (e.g., “$10,000”). The Defendant will then have to file a new appeal of that order, at which point the appellate court (armed with its own prior opinion) will almost certainly reverse it.
This is a perfect example of how complex, technical, and unforgiving the legal system can be. It is not a place for “do-it-yourself” legal work. A single procedural misstep can cost a party years of time and thousands of dollars, even when the law is on their side.
Conclusion: Enforcement is Not a Simple Matter
The Robilotta case is a powerful illustration of the consequences that flow from a single, willful violation of a final judgment. It demonstrates that the law provides multiple “hammers” for enforcement, but that each hammer comes with its own complex set of rules, burdens, and financial consequences.
Whether you are a Tampa resident who is owed unpaid child support, medical expenses, or alimony, or you are the party being accused of non-payment, this case proves that the stakes are incredibly high. The distinction between civil and criminal contempt, the rules on attorney’s fees, and the rigid procedures for appeals are not just “legal jargon”; they are the rules of a high-stakes game that can result in probation, incarceration, and significant financial liability.
Navigating the enforcement of a Tampa divorce decree requires a Tampa divorce lawyer who understands these complex and different paths. A skilled attorney can analyze your specific situation and advise you on the most effective (and cost-effective) strategy to achieve your goals, whether that is to get paid or to defend yourself against an unjust accusation.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What is the difference between civil contempt and criminal contempt? Civil contempt is coercive—its goal is to make a person comply with a court order (e.g., pay the money). Criminal contempt is punitive—its goal is to punish a person for their past, willful defiance of a court order.
What are “uncovered medical expenses”? This is a form of child support. It refers to the portion of a child’s medical, dental, or prescription bills that are not covered by insurance. A final judgment will almost always specify the percentage each parent is responsible for paying.
Can I get my attorney’s fees paid if I file for contempt? In a civil contempt case, Florida law absolutely allows the court to award attorney’s fees to the prevailing party. However, as the Robilotta case shows, courts have ruled that you cannot get your private attorney’s fees paid as “restitution” in a criminal contempt case.
Why did the court reverse the “prosecution costs”? The $100 in prosecution costs was reversed because that specific statute is designed to reimburse the State Attorney’s office. Because the state was not involved and a private attorney prosecuted the case, the court had no authority to order it.
What does it mean for an appeal to be “premature”? An appeal can only be filed from a “final order.” In this case, the trial court’s order only reserved jurisdiction to set the amount of attorney’s fees. Because no final dollar amount was set, the order was not “final,” and the appeal was filed too early, or “prematurely.”
The McKinney Law Group: Experienced Divorce Attorneys Serving Tampa Clients
We guide clients through all aspects of divorce—from asset division and custody to support agreements—with clear legal strategies and personalized attention.
Call 813-428-3400 or email [email protected] to schedule your consultation.