Background
Jason Funk owed monthly support to the mothers of two children and accumulated more than $21,000 in combined arrears. His tree-service business collapsed after equipment was stolen and a garage fire destroyed borrowed equipment. He later obtained warehouse work, lived rent-free with his mother, and made a partial payment before a sanctions hearing.
The York County court found him in civil contempt and imposed six months in jail followed by probation. Funk could avoid imprisonment by paying $2,000 or completing 120 days of work release. The Superior Court initially rejected the work-release option but upheld the monetary purge. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court vacated that disposition and directed reconsideration under its intervening decision in Bredbenner v. Hall, which addressed proof of ability to satisfy a financial purge.
The Court’s Holding
On remand, the Superior Court vacated both purge conditions. Judge Mary Jane Bowes explained that a civil-contempt sanction must give the contemnor a realistic means of release. The evidence did not adequately establish Funk’s present ability to pay $2,000 at the time of sentencing, even though the trial court disbelieved his account of receiving only one $600 paycheck and suspected that wage garnishments or family assistance could cover the amount.
Under Bredbenner, the obligor may not bear the entire burden of disproving ability to comply. The court must develop a sufficient record and make the ability determination before imposing a coercive financial condition. Frustration with last-minute payments and a history of finding money when incarceration approaches cannot replace current evidence.
The 120-day work-release alternative was also invalid because Funk could not immediately perform it as a means of avoiding confinement. The panel remanded for a hearing at which the court may receive evidence and select conditions that are coercive but genuinely within Funk’s power.
Key Takeaways
- A civil-contempt purge must offer a present and practical path to release.
- The support obligor does not carry the entire burden on ability to pay.
- Past borrowing or eleventh-hour payment does not conclusively establish current access to funds.
- Work release cannot function as a purge when it is itself a form of custody the contemnor cannot immediately complete.
Why It Matters
The decision translates Bredbenner into courtroom practice for domestic-relations cases. Support enforcement remains available, but the record must distinguish unwillingness from inability and must connect the amount selected to resources actually available at sentencing.
Family-law practitioners should present concrete evidence of net pay, garnishment, assets, debts, household expenses, and possible loans. Courts should make explicit findings rather than inferring ability solely from arrears or prior noncompliance. That process preserves effective enforcement while preventing civil contempt from becoming punishment without criminal safeguards.