Ex Parte Mabry

Decision Date06 July 1932
Docket NumberNo. 6162.,6162.
Citation52 S.W.2d 73
PartiesEx parte MABRY.
CourtTexas Supreme Court

W. R. Blain and David E. O'Fiel, both of Beaumont, for relator.

LEDDY, C.

On the 19th day of September, 1931, in the case of Mabry Foundry & Machine Company et al. v. C. D. Mabry, pending in the district court of Jefferson county, Tex., an injunction was issued restraining the defendant, the relator in this case, from interfering in any way with the management of the affairs of said corporation.

On the 23d day of October, 1931, on motion of F. L. Pivito, the duly appointed, qualified, and acting receiver of said company, relator, after due service of citation, was on a hearing adjudged in contempt of said court because of a willful violation of the terms of said injunction. The specific violation found by the court in his order adjudging relator in contempt was his action, after the service of the injunction aforesaid, in collecting certain accounts due by various parties to said corporation and appropriating the proceeds thereof to his own use.

The court in its order adjudging relator in contempt recited the specific acts done and performed by him in violation of said injunction. The order also contained this provision: "It is therefore hereby ordered, adjudged and decreed by the court that the said C. D. Mabry be and he is hereby adjudged in contempt of this court and is hereby fined as for contempt the sum of $100.00 and is hereby ordered committed to the custody of the Sheriff of this county to be confined in the county jail of this county for which let commitment issue, which commitment shall be accompanied with a certified copy of this judgment to be delivered to said C. D. Mabry, and there he, the said C. D. Mabry to be kept until he shall purge himself of said contempt of this court by delivering over to the receiver, F. L. Pivito, the sum of $410.69 and by the payment to the Clerk of this court of said fine of $100.00 for the benefit of the State of Texas, and it is further ordered that said C. D. Mabry pay all costs of this proceeding, for all of which costs let execution issue."

No commitment was issued on this order until the first day of April, 1932. Under the commitment then issued, the sheriff of Jefferson county was commanded `to take the body of said C. D. Mabry and safely keep in custody in the county jail of Jefferson County until he shall purge himself of contempt of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Ex parte Helms
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Texas
    • 17 Junio 1953
    ...Ex parte Steinhauser, 133 Tex.Cr.R. 166, 109 S.W.2d 485; Allen v. Woodward, 111 Tex. 457, 239 S.W. 602, 22 A.L.R. 1253; Ex parte Mabry, 122 Tex. 54, 52 S.W.2d 73; Ex parte De Wees, 146 Tex. 564, 210 S.W.2d 145. On the other hand, it is well established that a proceeding of this nature is a ......
  • Ex parte Sutherland
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas
    • 17 Julio 1974
    ...the invalidity of that portion of the commitment does not excuse relator from obeying the valid portion thereof. Ex parte Mabry, 122 Tex. 54, 52 S.W.2d 73 (1932); Ex parte Tinsley, 37 Tex.Cr.R. 517, 40 S.W. 306 (1897); Ex parte Kruegel, 47 Tex.Cr.R. 607, 86 S.W. 1020 Accordingly, the applic......
  • Hodous v. Hodous
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • 22 Marzo 1949
    ...sums that were properly provided for. Ex parte Tinsley, 37 Tex. Cr. R. 517, 40 S.W. 306,66 Am.St.Rep. 818; Ex parte Mabry, 122 Tex. 54, 52 S.W.2d 73;In re Landau, 230 App.Div. 308, 243 N.Y.S. 732;Liquor Control Commission v. McGillis, 91 Utah 586, 65 P.2d 1136. The order of May 5, 1948 dire......
  • Hodous v. Hodous
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • 22 Marzo 1949
    ... ... [Copyrighted Material Omitted] ... [36 N.W.2d 556] ...         Syllabus ... by the Court ...         1 ... An ex parte order of the trial court issued during the ... pendency of a divorce action directing payment by the ... defendant of temporary alimony and suit ... that were properly provided for. Ex parte Tinsley, 37 Tex ... Cr. R. 517, 40 S.W. 306, 66 Am.St.Rep. 818; Ex parte Mabry, ... 122 Tex. 54, 52 S.W.2d 73; In re Landau, 230 A.D. 308, 243 ... N.Y.S. 732; Liquor Control Commission v. McGillis, 91 Utah ... 586, 65 P.2d ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT