Case ID: wis_174/html/0536-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Vinje, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

State ex rel. Jackson, Defendant in error, vs. Reid, Plaintiff in error.
    
      May 7
    
    July 13, 1921.
    
    
      Appeal: Order adjudging contempt: How appeal taken: Contempt in proceedings under unconstitutional statute.
    
    1. An order adjudging one guilty of contempt is appealable, under sec. 3069, Stats. It is not an order, under sec. 3043, from which a writ of error lies, and hence its validity should be tested by appeal.
    
      2. Ch. 16, Laws 1920 (Special Session), known as the Rent Law, having been declared unconstitutional by this court (State ex rel. Milwaukee Sales & Inv. Co. v. Railroad Comm., ante, p. 458), all proceedings under it are void, and the circuit court should reverse its order adjudging defendant guilty of contempt for refusal to answer questions in a proceeding thereunder.
    ERROR to review an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee county: Gustave G. Gei-irz, Circuit Judge.
    
      Writ quashed.
    
    Writ of error brought to test the validity of an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee county in a civil contempt proceéding adjudging defendant guilty of contempt because of his refusal to answer certain questions in a proceeding under ch. 16, Laws 1920 (Special Session), known as the “Rent Law.”
    For the plaintiff in error there was a brief by Rose & Sloan of Milwaukee, and oral argument by David S. Rose.
    
    For the defendant in error there was a brief by the Attorney General, Ralph M. Hoyt, deputy attorney general, and /. F. Baker, assistant attorney general; and the cause was argued orally by Mr. Hoyt and Mr. Baker.
    
   Vinje, J.

The order is an appealable one. Sec. 3069, Stats. 1919; Vilter Mfg. Co. v. Humphrey, 132 Wis. 587, 112 N. W. 1095. It is not an order under sec. 3043, Stats. 1919, from which a writ of error, lies, hence its validity should have been tested by appeal and not by a writ of error. The writ gives us no jurisdiction and must therefore be quashed. Ogden v. State, 162 Wis. 500, 156 N. W. 476.

Since ch. 16, Laws 1920 (Special Session), is unconstitutional (see State ex rel. Milwaukee S. & I. Co. v. Railroad Comm., decided herewith (ante, p. 458, 183 N. W. 687), it follows that all proceedings under it are void, and the circuit court should reverse its order and discharge the defendant.

By the Court. — Writ quashed.