Hamma v. People
| Decision Date | 02 March 1908 |
| Citation | 42 Colo. 401,94 P. 326 |
| Parties | HAMMA v. PEOPLE. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Error to Teller County Court; Thornton H. Thomas, Judge.
M. M Hamma was convicted for contempt of court, and brings error. Reversed and remanded, with directions to dismiss.
Plaintiff in error was tried and convicted for a contempt of court. Such trial and conviction were based upon the following circumstances: The statutes of the state (Mills' Ann. St Rev. Supp.) require certain county officers, including the county judge, to keep an account of all fees, emoluments, and expenditures connected with their offices, in the same manner such officers are required to make a monthly report to the board of county commissioners showing the condition of such accounts. These accounts must, also, by virtue of the statute, be always open to inspection and examination by the board of county commissioners, and the duty is expressly imposed upon that board to audit, correct, and adjust the same in accordance with the facts. The statutes referred to read as follows:
In the year 1906 plaintiff in error was employed by the county commissioners of Teller county as an expert accountant to examine the accounts of the different county officers mentioned in the statute, and report the result of his examinations to the board. Upon investigation of the accounts of the county judge, plaintiff in error, among other things, reported that the books of this official had been kept in a careless manner, and it was difficult to determine therefrom the exact amount of cash on hand at any particular time; but that there seemed to be a shortage, stating the amount of such shortage. The correctness of this report was at once denied by the county judge, and further investigations through the medium of the grand jury and otherwise ensued. Some difficulty arose in distinguishing between the accounts of the county judge and those of the clerk of the county court; but the last expert accountant who was selected and appointed by the county judge himself ultimately attested the accuracy of the accounts of both judge and clerk, and concluded that no shortage existed in either. An article was published in one of the Cripple Creek papers severely reflecting upon the plaintiff in error, and, among other things, challenging his ability as an expert accountant. This article was assumed by him to have been inspired in part at least by the county judge; and, responding thereto, he wrote and published the communication which is the foundation for the present contempt proceeding. Thereupon the clerk of the county court filed in said court an affidavit reviewing the circumstances, and including the newspaper article thus written by plaintiff in error. A citation was then issued charging plaintiff in error with contempt of court. He appeared and filed a lengthy answer, in which he admitted writing and publishing the communication, but denied any intent thereby to obstruct the administration of justice, to bring the county court into disrepute, or to cast any reflection upon the county judge in his judicial capacity. The cause was brought on for trial before the county court, evidence was taken, and an extended hearing was had; plaintiff in error being found guilty and adjudged to pay a fine of $500, and suffer imprisonment in the county jail for the period of 10 days. In view of the conclusion reached by this court, it is unnecessary to incorporate into the present statement either the pleadings or the newspaper publication upon which the contempt proceeding was based. In so far as the contents thereof are necessary or important, the substance is sufficiently stated in the opinion.
Dines, Whitted & Dines, C. C. Butler, and L. G. Campbell, for plaintiff in error.
Wm. H. Dickson, Atty. Gen., Horace Phelps, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Theodore H. Thomas, for the State.
HELM, J. (after stating the facts as above).
Plaintiff in error was tried, convicted, and sentenced for an alleged contempt of court in the publication of a certain newspaper article. This article resulted from a controversy growing out of the action of plaintiff in error as an expert accountant employed under the statute by the county commissioners of Teller county to investigate and report upon the accounts of certain officers, including the county judge. The method employed in keeping the account of fees, emoluments, expenditures, etc., which the statute requires that official to keep, together with certain shortages charged as appearing therein, were the foundation of the entire controversy. No facts are stated in the affidavit or information upon which the attachment issued, or in the return or answer thereto by respondent, reflecting upon the county judge in his judicial capacity. Nor is there any reference in the publication itself to any judgment, order, or proceeding pending or determined in relation to causes, estates, or other matters requiring judicial action by that court or judge. The concluding words of this article, to which exception is specially taken, referring to the misuse of public funds by a 'public official,' clearly relate, as we shall presently see, to the judge's action in performing a purely ministerial duty. Under these circumstances, it seems to us that the honorable county judge misconceived the remedy provided by law for such injuries as he may have suffered through the publication mentioned. We are of opinion that the issuing of an attachment for contempt was not only erroneous, but was in excess of the jurisdiction possessed by the court.
The proposition will hardly be disputed that in this class of contempts the libelous or slanderous publication must relate to judicial action; that it must have reference to a judicial decision, order, or proceeding...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cook v. City of Topeka, 54152
...to courts, no one would ever suppose that it had any of the attributes of judicial power." 10 Kan. at 404-05. See also Hamma v. People, 42 Colo. 401, 94 P. 326 (1908) wherein it was "Judicial functions are determined by the intrinsic character of the duty or act itself, and not by the chara......
-
People ex rel. Riordan v. Hersey
... ... (8) To ... attend at the drawing of the names from the box ... The ... only functions here mentioned which resemble judicial ... functions are the fifth and sixth. The third is a ministerial ... function (In re Virginia, 100 U.S. 348, 25 L.Ed. 676; Hamma ... v. People, 42 Colo. 401, 94 P. 326, 15 L.R.A. [N. S.] 621, 15 ... Ann.Cas. 655) formerly performed by the county commissioners ... and is the real and substantial duty of the office of jury ... commissioner to which all the others are ancillary or ... incidental; the first, second, fourth, ... ...
-
In re Cottingham
...it was held that the fact that a judge was slandered did not of itself prove that a contempt had been committed. The citation from Hamma v. People, supra, is conclusive as to position of this court upon that question. The respondents were not guilty of contempt, and the judgment should be r......
-
Akbarnia v. Deming
...title of the person claiming immunity and focus on the intrinsic character of the conduct in issue. Id. at 956 (citing Hamma v. People, 42 Colo. 401, 94 P. 326 (1908)). In this case, defendants contend that they are entitled to judicial immunity for the performance of their court-appointed ......