by the methods provided for the collection of civil judgments. A contempt proceeding is not a proper method by which to collect a civil judgment.” In re Buffington (1993), 89 Ohio App.3d 814, 816, 627 N.E.2d 1013, citing Heidelberg College v. Depew (1988), 44 Ohio Misc.2d 20, 541 N.E.2d 637. {¶ 14} Likewise, a creditor may not resort to a criminal contempt proceeding to punish a debtor who fails to abide by a prior agreement to work to satisfy a civil debt. Although a debtor voluntarily may enter into an agreement to work to satisfy a debt, he cannot be arrested and punished if he later changes his mind and refuses to labor. United States v. Reynolds (1914), 235 U.S. 133, 138-147, 35 S.Ct. 86, 59 L.Ed. 162; see, also, Bailey v. Alabama (1911), 219 U.S. 219, 31 S.Ct. 145, 55 L.Ed. 191 (<HOLDING>); Gen. Elec. Co. v. Internatl. Union United
holding civil action cannot be joined to a criminal appeal holding arresting a person for refusing to provide his or her name violates the fourth amendment holding that a slow remedial process or one that leaves an employee exposed to harassment cannot be effective holding that a person cannot be exposed to a criminal conviction simply for failing or refusing to perform an agreement for personal services to satisfy a civil debt holding that attorneys claim for professional services against person sui juris or against property of such person must rest upon contract of employment express or implied made with person sought to be charged or with his agent