Silvia Santo v. Chad Batterman

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania family law lawyers represented the parties in a divorce.



Batterman and Silvia Santo ("Santo") were married in November 2014, separated in November 2017, and divorced in August 2023. The parties had two children during the marriage. In December 2017, Santo filed a complaint for child support against Batterman. On June 22, 2018, the trial court entered a final child support order calculating Batterman's monthly obligation for the two children to be $686.00 per month.



* * *



Santo filed a petition for contempt of the initial child support order.[1] As a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, the hearing on the petition was delayed until April 1, 2022. At that hearing, Batterman did not appear and the trial court issued a bench warrant. Batterman surrendered three days later, but the trial court did not resolve the contempt petition and instead scheduled a hearing. At the next scheduled hearing on September 1, 2022, Batterman again failed to appear, and the trial court issued another bench warrant. Batterman returned to the courthouse on September 9, 2022, but the trial court did not decide the petition at that time. The trial court scheduled a hearing on the contempt petition for October 31, 2022. Once again, Batterman failed to appear at that hearing, prompting the trial court to issue another bench warrant. Batterman came to the courthouse the following day, but left before there was any resolution to the

contempt petition. As a result, the trial court issued a bench warrant, which was subsequently reissued on November 3, 2022.[2] On November 15, 2022, while still a fugitive, Batterman filed three petitions: a petition to assign the support case as complex, a petition to reinstate his driver's license, and a petition to suspend/modify his child support.



* * *



Legal issue Can a court find an individual in contempt for failing to pay child support despite claims of inability to work due to medical issues?



Key Phrases Contempt for violating a support order. Civil contempt petition. Child support obligations. Parents' financial support. Attorney-client privilege.

Defendant was found to be in contempt for violating a support order, sentencing him to thirty days' incarceration, and imposing a purge factor of $5,000.



Affirmed