State v. District Court of Taylor County

• Decision Date: 10 May 1904
• Parties: THE STATE OF IOWA ON THE PETITION OF F. L. ARTHAUD, v. THE DISTRICT COURT OF TAYLOR COUNTY, IOWA
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

99 N.W. 712

124 Iowa 187

THE STATE OF IOWA ON THE PETITION OF F. L. ARTHAUD, v. THE DISTRICT COURT OF TAYLOR COUNTY, IOWA

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

May 10, 1904

Certiorari from Taylor District Court.--HON. R. L. PARRISH Judge.

Arthaud & Arthaud, for petitioner.

No appearance for respondent.

OPINION

THE opinion states the case.

WEAVER J.

A fine having been assessed against the petitioner by the trial court for an alleged contempt, a writ of certiorari has been sued out for a review of said proceedings. The return made to the writ simply certifies the record entry of the judgment of the district court, which is in the following words:

"State of Iowa v. F. L. Arthaud. Be it remembered that on this 4th day of March, 1903, at the February term of this court F. L. Arthaud, being an attorney in attendance upon said court, having been, in the judgment of the court, guilty of contemptuous and insolent behavior towards said court, which may tend to impair the respect due to its authority, in language and conduct, in refusing to obey the orders of the court, and in his remarks and conduct towards the court in this as in many other instances during the term, the court has adjudged him in contempt, and assessed a fine of $ 25, which the clerk is ordered to record. At the same time the court directs, as provided by statute, that the said F. L. Arthaud may make such written explanation of his conduct, under oath, to be filed, as he sees fit."

I. It is contended by the petitioner that this return is, upon its face, insufficient to sustain the judgment of which complaint is made, and we think the contention is well founded. Ordinarily a proceeding to punish a party for contempt of court must be founded on an affidavit showing the nature of the conduct or act charged, and rule must issue to the defendant to show cause against punishment, and reasonable time allowed therefor. In case, however, the contempt is committed in the presence of the court, the affidavit and order to show cause may be omitted. Code, sections 4464, 4465. In either case the person so charged may file a written explanation of his conduct, under oath, which must be filed and preserved. Code, section 4465. It is quite clearly the intent of the statute to allow the party the right to file such explanation before the assessment of punishment, and we have held that reasonable time should be allowed for that purpose, if time be asked. State v. Duffy, 15 Iowa 425. To assess punishment first, and allow explanation afterward, would be an entire reversal of the ordinary course of judicial proceedings. The statute appears to proceed upon the reasonable theory that cases may arise in which acts or conduct constituting an alleged contempt are susceptible of explanation which will purge them of their apparent offensiveness, and relieve the accused of the odium of the charge made against him; and the right thus guaranteed to be of any value, must be granted before he is adjudged guilty. Following this view, we held in Russell v. French, 67 Iowa 102, 24 N.W. 741, that, upon a charge of contempt committed by an attorney in the presence of the court, "he...