Case ID: ohio-law-abs_1/html/0536-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "VICKERY, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 558
    MILLER v. STATE
    Ohio Appeals, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County
    No. 4688.
    Decided June 11, 1923
    This opinion has not been published except in Abstract.
    CONTEMPT OF COURT — Misconduct of counsel in court is contempt, although it does not obstruct justice.
    Attorneys — Mills, Knight and Miller, for Miller; L. E. Skeel, for State.
   VICKERY, J.

Epitomized Opinion

Miller, an attorney, represented plaintiff in a case before Judge T. E. Green of the Cleveland Municipal Court. Just after the court had heard the case and announced judgment, Miller said in the presence of the court: “That judgment is unfair and if I had a stenographer present it would have been different!” The court asked him to .withdraw his remarks and apologize. Miller refused and the court assessed a fine of $25 and ordered him committed till the fine was paid. Miller refused a writ of habeas corpus. He prosecuted error to this court on the grounds: (1) Criticism of a judge after termination of a case is not contempt of court,' and (2) no charges in writing were filed. The Court of Appeals in affirming the judgment of the trial court held:

1. Proceedings were not ended.

2. Misconduct of a lawyer in presence of the court is a contempt punishable summarily, whether it Obstructs justice or not.

3. It is not necessary to file a complaint and give defendant notice of it.