Alonzo Hill appealed a temporary order arising from a contentious family-law dispute. The trial court held Hill in contempt for violating an earlier decree and awarded attorney fees, while also addressing contempt allegations involving Chanestia Davis. The Court of Appeals upheld the contempt ruling against Hill, explaining that the record supported the finding that he knowingly disobeyed the court’s order and that the trial court’s factual determinations were not clearly erroneous. The panel rejected Hill’s arguments that the contempt finding required a different showing of intent or that the trial judge had relied on an impermissible factual finding. The court vacated the attorney-fee award, however, because the order identified multiple possible statutory bases without explaining which provision supported the award or making the necessary findings. The case was remanded for the trial court to state the statutory basis for the fees and enter any required factual findings. The judgment was affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded. One judge concurred in the judgment only as to the fee issue.