In this appeal of a contempt Order, Naseer obtained a final judgment in a civil lawsuit in the amount of $530,000. Following entry of judgment, and at the request of Nasser, the Court entered an Order requiring Neiman to appear before a special magistrate for examination into his property and assets. In response, Neiman, who was living in the country of Panama, asked for a stay claiming that his health prevented him from travelling, which the Court granted. One year having past, Nasser again requested an examination of Neiman and Neiman moved for a stay based on his health, which was denied. Neiman then failed to appear for examination.
Naseer then moved for a finding of contempt of court and presented evidence that Neiman had recently traveled outside of Panama and that he claimed a net worth in excess of $7 million. The Court granted the motion for contempt finding that Neiman willfully violated the Court’s previous Order and imposed a $2,000 per day fine for each day Nasser failed to appear and ordered that a warrant be issued for Neiman’s arrest. The Order provided that Neiman was to remain in jail until he appeared before the Court and “fully [paid] all fines and attorneys’ fees and costs then accrued.”
The Fourth DCA struck the incarceration provisions of the Order finding that an order requiring an individual to be incarcerated for contempt must state with particularity the exact amount that will purge the contempt and open the jail house doors. Citing Alves v. Barnett Mortgage Co., 688 So.2d 459 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).