Coursey v. Superior Court (1987) 194 Cal.App.3d 147
Holding
A custodial parent cannot be held in contempt for a child’s refusal to visit absent substantial evidence (a) that the parent had the ability to comply with the visitation order (i.e., to compel the child’s attendance) and (b) that the parent willfully disobeyed the order. The Court of Appeal annulled a contempt adjudication in which a mother was fined and sentenced to jail (suspended) for her teenage daughter’s refusal to attend visitation with her father, finding insufficient evidence on both prongs.
Relevance to this matter
Critical defensive citation if Jennifer attempts to defeat any future contempt motion by attributing the refusal pattern to the children’s preferences rather than her own conduct. The factual record here distinguishes Coursey: documentation in EX05–EX10, EX18, EX19, EX21 reflects Jennifer’s own decisions to withhold parenting time (citing personal comfort, not safety plan or court order), with active coordination patterns (texts to grandfather, “I will comply with the schedule” admissions, accidental forwards). Coursey applies where the child’s autonomous refusal is the cause; the Nibley record largely involves parent-decision conduct. Useful to anticipate and pre-rebut a Coursey defense.