Pennekamp v. Circuit Court of Eleventh Judicial Circuit In and For Dade County
| Decision Date | 27 February 1945 |
| Citation | 155 Fla. 589,21 So.2d 41 |
| Parties | PENNEKAMP et al. v. CIRCUIT COURT OF ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR DADE COUNTY. In re PENNEKAMP et al. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; Paul D. Barns and Marshall C. Wiseheart, Judges.
Milam McIlvaine & Milam, of Jacksonville. Edward E. Fleming, of Miami, and Elisha Hanson, of Washington, D. C., for appellants.
J. Tom Watson, Atty. Gen., and George M. Powell, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
John D. Pennekamp and The Miami Herald Publishing Company were found in contempt of court by Judges Paul D. Barns and Marshall C. Wiseheart in that they had published cartoons and editorials derogatory to the court. The sentence was that Pennekamp pay a fine of $250 and The Miami Herald Publishing Company pay a fine of $1000. Said sums to be paid into the Dade County Fine and Forfeiture Fund and in default of payment an execution issue for same.
Doubt as to the proper method to review the judgment prompted them to enter an appeal and at the same time to apply for a writ of certiorari. Several motions are now before us. One by the state to dismiss the appeal. Another by the appellants to consolidate the appeal and petition for certiorari and another to defer ruling on the motion to dismiss until final hearing.
The primary question is which is the proper method to review the judgment and should we decide the question now or wait until final hearing? We see no reason to delay deciding the question but on the contrary think it should be settled first.
We are without precedent in Florida on this question, inasmuch as we have reviewed no judgment in contempt like this. The rule is, that ordinarily certiorari will not lie where there is another adequate remedy. Kilgore v. Bird, 149 Fla. 570, 6 So.2d 541.
Heretofore we have reviewed judgments in contempt by habeas corpus. Such remedy is not applicable to this case inasmuch as the judgment does not detain the appellants. Contempt proceedings are criminal in nature. Rule 37 of this Court provides that appeals shall be taken in criminal cases in conformity to Section 290, Florida Criminal Procedure Act, F.S.A. § 924.11.
We hold that appeal is the proper method to review the judgment. The motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.
So ordered.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sandstrom v. State
... ... Nos. 47201, 47450 ... Supreme Court of Florida ... June 30, 1976 ... Rehearing ... contempt entered in the trial courts of Dade and Broward County. His first conviction, in ... In each case the circuit judge ordered him to don a fabric necktie and ... 8 Later in Pennekamp v. Circuit Court, 9 the Court expanded the ... to regulate the attire of attorneys in judicial proceedings, and that the orders requiring ... ...
-
State ex rel. Mitchell v. Kelly
...is by appeal. The necessity of resort to habeas corpus no longer exists. See Ex parte, Senior, 37 Fla. 1, 19 So. 652, In re Pennekamp, 155 Fla. 589, 21 So.2d 41. The inquisition by the grand jury related to 'the gambling activities in Dade County of Dave Marcus both as to a conspiracy to vi......
-
Local Lodge No. 1248 of Intern. Ass'n of Machinists, In re, C-309
...private rights of a litigant. In our former decision we relied on Lewis v. Lewis, Fla.1955, 78 So.2d 711, and Pennekamp v. Circuit Court, etc., 155 Fla. 589, 21 So.2d 41, as authority for our holding, from which we now recede, that the judgment of contempt here involved was reviewable only ......
-
Local Lodge No. 1248 of Intern. Ass'n of Machinists v. St. Regis Paper Co., C-251
...735.3 Union Tool Co. v. Wilson, 259 U.S. 107, 42 S.Ct. 427, 66 L.Ed. 848.4 Lewis v. Lewis, Fla.1955, 78 So.2d 711; Pennekamp v. Circuit Court, etc., 155 Fla. 589, 21 So.2d 41; Wells v. State, Fla.1949, 38 So.2d 464.5 Seaboard Airline Ry. Co. v. Tampa Southern R. Co., 101 Fla. 468, 134 So. 5......