Hunter v. State
Citation | 6 Ind. 339 |
Parties | Hunter v. The State |
Decision Date | 11 June 1855 |
Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
From the Lawrence Court of Common Pleas.
The appeal is dismissed.
S. W Short, H. C. Newcomb and J. S. Harvey, for appellant.
D. C Chipman and J. W. Gordon, for the State.
Contempt of Court. Defendant fined. Appeal to this Court.
The bill of exceptions states the case thus: &c.
The appellant objects to the fine inflicted upon him, and to the mode in which he was prosecuted.
But a preliminary question arises as to the right of appeal to another tribunal in a case of contempt.
In 1822 the point was before this Court for adjudication, in the case of State v. Tipton, 1 Blackf. 166, and in giving their decision the Court say: . .
But in 1843 the legislature enacted, (sec. 114, R. S., p. 664,) that--
"In all proceedings against an attorney and counsellor at law, wherein a judgment of any kind for a contempt or official malconduct shall be rendered against him, he may prosecute an appeal or writ of error to the Supreme Court of the state, subject to the same regulations and restrictions as are provided in regard to actions at law." See Ingle v. State, 8 Blackf. 574.
And in 1848 a case occurred which occasioned the giving of a construction to this section of the statute by the Supreme Court. The construction was, that the section applied only to cases where a lawyer had "been adjudged guilty of a contempt for some misconduct in his office." The Court...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kee v. Armstrong, Byrd & Co.
... ... of facts out of which the charge arises, or which is necessary or useful to make the charge intelligible, or, in other words, it is intended to state facts whereby the libel or slander is rendered intelligible, and is shown to contain an injurious imputation. 7. Same--"Colloquium." A "colloquium" ... ...
-
Jenkins v. Mehra
...307, 310 (1969); see Cossart v. State, 14 Ark. 538, 541–42 (1854); Cooper v. People, 13 Colo. 337, 22 P. 790, 795 (1889); Hunter v. State, 6 Ind. 339, 340 (1855); New England Novelty Co. v. Sandberg, 315 Mass. 739, 54 N.E.2d 915, 917 (1944); Masonite Corp. v. International Woodworkers of Am......
-
Kee v. Armstrong, Byrd & Co.
... ... the charge arises, or which is necessary or useful to make ... the charge intelligible, or, in other words, it is intended ... to state facts whereby the libel or slander is rendered ... intelligible, and is shown to contain an injurious ... imputation ... [Ed ... ...
-
Peterson v. Murray
... ... , that one act of illicit sexual intercourse constitutes a woman a whore.It is true, as appellant's counsel urge, that in an early case in this state it was held by a divided court that one act of illicit sexual intercourse committed by a woman ever after rendered her a whore,-Alcorn v. Hooker, 7 ... ...