Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-04-12


ministering em.' 128 u S. 3l3.
In re Woa,ey Il hy. % was held
t. at to incdrp rate into .. p ton for
rehearing he statement that Your
.onors have rendered an unjust de-
t cree" and othe insulting matter, is
to commit in open court an cot con-
shutting contempt on the part of the
attorney: and hat where the lar
guare spoken or written is Of itself
necessarily offensive, the disavowal OF
, an intention to commit a contempt
may tend to excuse but cannot justify
the act. From paragraph in that
opinion We quote:
"An attorney nav unfit himself for
, the practice Of his profession by the
manner in which he conducts himself
in his intercourse with the courts. He
may be honest and capable, and yet
| he NAV so c~nduct himself as to cOntin-
ually interrupt the business of the
courts in which he practices; or he
NAV BY a systematic and continuous
: course of conduct, render it impoSsi-
bic for the courts to preserve their
self-respect and the respect of the
public and at the same time permit
him to act as an officer and attorney.
An attorney who thus studiOusly and
Systematically attempts to bring the
tribunals of justice into public con
> tempt is an unfit person to hold the
position and exercise the privileges of
an officer of those tribunals. An open
! notorious and pubic insult to the
highest judicial tribunal of the State
for which an attorney cOnfumaclousiy
refuses in any way to atone, may JUS
tifv the refusal of that tribunal TO
recognize him in the future as one of
{ its officers"
In re Cooper. 80 VT. 262. the re-
spondent was fined for ironically stat
ing to justice of the peace, Il think
this magistrate wiser than the SUI
; preme court" Redfield, c. J., said:
The counsel must submit IN a jus
> tice court IS well as in this court,
| and with the same formal resnect.
II howeN er difficult. it may lie either
= here or there
we do not see that the relatOr has
: any alternative left him but the sub
i mission to what re no doubt regards
as a misapprehension of the law. both
:: on the part of the Justice and CT this
10 court And in that respect he is in a
condition very similar 10 many who
u have failed to convince others of the
~ soundness of their own views, or to
a became convinced themselves 0 fthell
!, falacy."
In Mahoney V. State. - n. F. Isl
q an attOrnev was fined $50 for saying
:, Il want to see whether the court i:
a right or lot ! want II know whethe
l am going to be heard in this case in
;. the interests OF NV client or "
:. | and making other insolent statements
- In Redman v. State % Ind, the iudg
~ informed counsel that question wa;
- improper and the attorney replied
- s'If we cannot examine our witnesse:
:, he can stand aside" This langnag t
!, was deemed offensive ana the cour
prohibited that particular attorney
,r from examining the next witness.
~ In Brown v. Brown " Ind. 72I ~"
lawyer was taxed with the cost of thu
" action for filing and reading petition
- for divorce which was unnecessarily
i. gross and indicate.
,al In Mccormick v. Sheridan. 20 P "a
n IS. Cal. "a petition for rehearins
~ stated that how or why the honorable
of commission should have so efectuall.
g. and substantially ignored and disre
re- garded the Hncontradicted TESTIMONY
- we de not know. 1t seems That nei
Il Their the transcript nor our brief
p could have fallen under the commits
,n sioners observation. A more disin
Of eenious and misleading statement o
ID the evidence could not we'll be made
~ It is substantially untrue and unwaI
IT, ranted The decision seems to us t
at be q traversftv Of the evidence Hell
,e that counsel drafting the petition wa
ut guilty of contempt committed in tn
in face of the court. Notwithstanding
a. disavowal Of disrespectful intention
49, A dne Of 500 was imposed with an a
Tentative of serving in Jail.
ne The Chief Justice speaking for tn
w. curt in State Y. Morrill,. is Ark. 81
al said:
"a, IF it was the general habit OF tn
b community to denounce, degrade. an
OF disregard the decisions and judgment
r. Of the courts, no man of seif-respef
tx and lust pride Of re?u:a N w,nri r.
OF main upon the Uench. and such onl
be would become tae ministers OF IN
e law as were insensibie to defsmatto
it. and contempt But hapntly for tn
be / good order of society, men. an >espe
ht tally the people Of this country. al
to generally disposed tr respect an
Id abide the decisions Of the tribunal
as ordained by government as the go
mon arbiters Of their rights. 81
&c. where isolated individuals. In viol;
els ton Of the better. instincts Of huma
nature. and uisfegardful Of law ar
pit. order. wontanly attempt to obstru'
OF ,le course Of public justice by disr
be garding and exciting disrespect IL
nj the decislcns o.. its trin"na ;. ever
he good citizen, will point them out-s
in proper subjects for legal anlmadve
sion.
IL A court must naturally look first
sc an enlightened and conservative ba
Su- governed by a high sense of profe
i'd: sional ethics and deeply sensible, [
ed they always are. of its necessity
Of aid in the maintenance of public re
yer pect for its opinions"
Id In Somers v Torrey. 5 Paige Oh.