In Re Walters.
| Citation | 47 S.E.2d 709,229 N.C. 111 |
| Decision Date | 19 May 1948 |
| Docket Number | No. 671.,671. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina |
| Parties | In re WALTERS. |
Appeal from Superior Court, Robeson County; Chester Morris, Judge.
Proceeding in the matter of Frank Walters. From a judgment that Frank Walters was in contempt of court, he appeals.
Reversed.
Proceeding heard on notice to respondent to appear and show cause why he should not be adjudged in contempt of court.
In a civil action pending in the Robeson County Superior Court to determine the custody of an infant, a temporary restraining order against the defendant therein, one Carlton Walters, son of respondent, was issued 14 November 1947, restraining him from interfering with the plaintiff therein in respect to the custody of said infant.
On 1 December, about 11:00 p. m., officers, having said restraining order and the summons and complaint in hand for service on Carlton Walters, went to the home of respondent for the purpose of serving same. Respondent and his wife declined to admit them without a search warrant and they left. While it appears the officers had information the defendant was at the home of respondent, there is no evidence tending to show that he was in fact an inmate of or was at respondent's home when the officers arrived.
On 2 December, Katie Sealey, one of the plaintiffs in the civil action, filed an affidavit setting forth that respondent had "interfered with and resisted the officers in the performance of their duties, wilfully, in thathe positively forbade that the officers enter his home to serve the orders herein entered" and praying that a citation for contempt issue against respondent. Thereupon, the court issued its order citing respondent to appear and show cause why he should not be adjudged in contempt "for his wilful resistance of the officers of this Court, in the performance of their duties in this cause" and authorizing the officers, in serving or attempting to serve the citation and other process or orders in the case, "to enter homes, notwithstanding resistance, for the purpose of serving the process of this Court."
At the hearing on the citation the foregoing facts were made to appear. In addition, much testimony concerning extraneous matters was tendered and admitted. As such testimony in no wise affects the question here presented, it is not here summarized. The court adjudged that "respondent has committed a contempt of this Court in the interference aforesaid in the matter of the obstructing, hindering and delaying the service of process in said civil action" and sentenced respondent to a term in jail. Respondent excepted and appealed.
L. R. Varser and F. D. Hackett, Jr., both of Lumberton, for petitioner.
L. J. Britt and McLean & Stacy, all of Lumberton, for respondent.
This case is not one to call forth any extended discussion of the law of contempt. It is charged that respondent committed an indirect or constructive contempt which is an act tending "to degrade the court or obstruct, interrupt, prevent, or embarrass the administration of justice." 12 A. J. 391.
There are circumstances under which the willful interference...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. McMilliam
...of any action.' The search of defendants' home was 'made under conditions requiring the issuance of a search warrant.' In re Walters, 229 N.C. 111, 47 S.E.2d 709. Where the search is made under conditions requiring the issuance of a search warrant, and it is attempted, over objection, to ju......
-
State v. Mills, 3
...to search the back room in this house rented to the defendant. The Courts seem agreed (with exceptions not relevant here, In re Walters, 229 N.C. 111, 47 S.E.2d 709; Agnello v. U. S., 269 U.S. 20, 46 S.Ct. 4, 6, 70 L.Ed. 145, 149) that the fundamental law of State and Federal Constitutions,......
- Donivant v. Swaim, 669.
- Donivant v. Swaim