Hawkins v. State

Citation126 Ind. 294, 26 N.E. 43
Case DateDecember 11, 1890
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

126 Ind. 294
26 N.E. 43

Hawkins et al.
v.
State.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

Dec. 11, 1890.


Appeal from circuit court, Daviess county; C. K. Thorp, Special Judge.


Padgett & Paget, for appellants. C. M. Mears, Pros. Atty., J. H. O'Neall, L. T. Michener, Atty. Gen., and J. H. Gillett, for the State.

ELLIOTT, J.

The appellants were adjudged guilty of contempt in disobeying

[26 N.E. 44]

an order of injunction, issued by the trial court, restraining them from interfering with the sheriff in the execution of a writ of ejectment. The injunction was issued to restrain them from interfering with the execution of the process issued in the ejectment case referred to in Hawkins v. State, 25 N. E. Rep. 818, (Oct. 31, 1890,) and we need not here rehearse the facts stated in the opinion in that case; for it is sufficient to say that the contempt for which the appellants were punished consisted in their acts performed in disobedience of the order of injunction issued to aid the sheriff in giving McDougal, the plaintiff in the ejectment action, possession of the land. The information upon which the attachment issued, as originally drawn, was entitled “William F. McDougal and the State of Indiana vs. Hiram L. Hawkins et al.,” and it is urged that the information is vitiated by the addition of McDougal's name. As McDougal's name was subsequently withdrawn from the information, no substantial injury was done the appellants, even if it be conceded that if it had remained the information would have been ill. We are not, however, willing to decide that a plaintiff who is injured by the disobedience of a writ of injunction may not lodge information with the court, and secure an attachment for contempt. Hawley v. Bennett, 4 Paige, 163; Secor v. Singleton, 35 Fed. Rep. 376; Worcester v. Truman, 1 McLean, 483. But, as that question is not directly presented, we give no direct judgment upon it, contenting ourselves with adjudging that no substantial injury was done the appellants in this instance.

The entire information is not verified, the prosecution having adopted the singular and censurable course of verifying parts only of the pleading. This course seems to have been adopted in order to obtain the affidavits of persons who had knowledge of particular facts; but this supplies no valid excuse for departing from the rules of procedure, and introducing unnecessary confusion into the record. No direct attack, however, was made upon the information assigning for cause the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 practice notes
  • Laramie National Bank v. Steinhoff
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • June 1, 1898
    ...482; Ray v. R. R. Co., 47 N. Y. S., 301; State v. Jamison (Minn.), 72 N.W. 451; State v. Dist. Court (Mont.), 40 P. 66; Hawkins v. State, 126 Ind. 294.) The test of the jurisdiction of the court is whether or not it had power to enter upon the inquiry, not whether its conclusion in the cour......
  • Ford v. State, (No. 5128.)
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • February 12, 1919
    ...39 N. W. 817; Smith v. Tel. Co., 83 Ky. 269; Central Union v. State, 110 Ind. 203, 10 N. E. 922, 12 N. E. 136; Hawkins et al. v. State, 126 Ind. 294, 26 N. E. 43; Heinlen v. Cross, 63 Cal. 44; Cole v. Edwards, 104 Iowa, 373, 73 N. W. 863; Wilkinson v. Dunkley, 141 Mich. 409, 104 N. W. 772; ......
  • Albert v. Milk Control Bd., No. 26624.
    • United States
    • March 26, 1936
    ...an injunction, nor authorize its disobedience. Until reversed, the decree is effective, and must be obeyed.’ Hawkins v. State (1890) 126 Ind. 294, 26 N.E. 43, 44;Cadwell v. Teaney (1927) 199 Ind. 634, 157 N.E. 51. In the instant case, however, there was, in effect, no real suspension. It wa......
  • Albert v. Milk Control Board of Indiana, 26,624
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • March 26, 1936
    ...vacate an injunction nor authorize its disobedience. Until reversed the appeal is effective and must be obeyed." Hawkins v. State (1890), 126 Ind. 294, 297, 26 N.E. 43; Cadwell v. Teaney (1928), 199 Ind. 634, 157 N.E. 51. In the instant case, however, there was, in effect, no real suspensio......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
22 cases
  • Laramie National Bank v. Steinhoff
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • June 1, 1898
    ...482; Ray v. R. R. Co., 47 N. Y. S., 301; State v. Jamison (Minn.), 72 N.W. 451; State v. Dist. Court (Mont.), 40 P. 66; Hawkins v. State, 126 Ind. 294.) The test of the jurisdiction of the court is whether or not it had power to enter upon the inquiry, not whether its conclusion in the cour......
  • Ford v. State, (No. 5128.)
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • February 12, 1919
    ...39 N. W. 817; Smith v. Tel. Co., 83 Ky. 269; Central Union v. State, 110 Ind. 203, 10 N. E. 922, 12 N. E. 136; Hawkins et al. v. State, 126 Ind. 294, 26 N. E. 43; Heinlen v. Cross, 63 Cal. 44; Cole v. Edwards, 104 Iowa, 373, 73 N. W. 863; Wilkinson v. Dunkley, 141 Mich. 409, 104 N. W. 772; ......
  • Albert v. Milk Control Bd., No. 26624.
    • United States
    • March 26, 1936
    ...an injunction, nor authorize its disobedience. Until reversed, the decree is effective, and must be obeyed.’ Hawkins v. State (1890) 126 Ind. 294, 26 N.E. 43, 44;Cadwell v. Teaney (1927) 199 Ind. 634, 157 N.E. 51. In the instant case, however, there was, in effect, no real suspension. It wa......
  • Albert v. Milk Control Board of Indiana, 26,624
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • March 26, 1936
    ...vacate an injunction nor authorize its disobedience. Until reversed the appeal is effective and must be obeyed." Hawkins v. State (1890), 126 Ind. 294, 297, 26 N.E. 43; Cadwell v. Teaney (1928), 199 Ind. 634, 157 N.E. 51. In the instant case, however, there was, in effect, no real suspensio......
  • 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