Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-04-06


officers c.. ged ~ the duty of ad-
ministerlrg { en-" 12S q. S. 3l3.
In re We e. j Nv. 80, t was held
t. at 70 inc p rae INTO . pC-tion for
rehearina etotemort that Your
-oncrs NJ rendered an unjust de-
cree" anC the in ulting matter, is
to commit - onen court IN act con-
stituting contempt on the part of the
attorney: End hat where the Ian
guare sDoken or written is CT itself
necessarily offensive, the disavowal OF
an intention to commit a cOnten,ot
i may tend to excuse but cannot justify
the act. From a paragraph in that
opinion we quote:
an attorney may unfit himself for
the y actice Cf his profession bv 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~rduct himself as to cOntin-
ually interrupt the business of the
courts in which he practices; or he
i NAV by a systematic and continuous
course Of conduct, render it impossi-
BILE for the courts to preserve their
selfrespect 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 cOntuma ciorsfy
refuses in any way to atone. may JUS
tify 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 Redheld, c. J.. said:
The counsel must submit IN a JUS
tice court as we'll as in this court,
and with the same formal respect,
howe, er difficult. it may he either
here or there
we do not see that the relatOr has
any alternative left him but the sub
! ! mission to what ne no doubt regards
as A misapprehension of the law. both
on the part of the justice and of this
) court And in that respect he is in a
!
have failed to convince others of the
! scundness Of their own views. or to
= became convinced themselves 0 ftheil
!. falacy.''
In Mahoney " State. L \. E. ISL
:. &C attorney was fined $50 for saying
u 81 want to see whether the court i:
right or rot ! VAN t, know ~hethe
am going to be heard in THIS case in
= the interests of nv clIeE. or n
!, and making other insoient statements
:. In Redman v. State IS Ind, the indg
;, informed counsel that question wa;
- improper and the attorney replied
= IF we cannot examine our witnesse:
y he can stand aside This Language
was deemed offensive and, the. cour
prohibited that particular attorne!
~ from examining the next witness.
r. In Brown v. Brown Nv Ind. 72i. til
lawyer wac taxed with the cost of tn
g action for fling and reading a, petition
= for divorce which, was unnecessarii!
:. gross and indicate.
!. In Mccormick ': Sheridan. 70 P "a
!. 7s, Cat: "A petition for nrehearint
" stated thah how or why the hsnprabl
# com mission should have so effectuail.
2. and substantially ignored and disre
q garted the 1ncontradicted testimony
81 We do not know. 1t SCENE .tnae nei
= Their "the Transcript nor our v brief
- could have fallen under the commits
= sioners observation. "A more disiH
4 genious notwithstanding ,statemept 70
"a the evidence COLD not we'll be made
< / Il is substantially untrue and unvel
4. ranted The decisiop seems to us t
1t EAe4 tfavextitv Of tile HvideR9es Hell
"a |thxt e1nneei drafting the petition wa
ot salty az ,rontempt eQmmttteo in th'
n face of tha court. Notwithstanding
A. disavowal Of disrespectful intention
5. A fine Of 5000 was imposed vito an a
tentative Of serving ID jeif
10 The yEhtef ,a;Iustiee Espe&kins for tn
Y. cnrrt in Stase;v .Merrfif.s is Ark. 81
a. II 1t WI WIS the general habit d til
b community, to denouncs. .aegr4de. m
1t Disregard the dectsions sf,d Judgment
r of ME courts, toiman nf seifFesper
il and just pride Of .rennsa,i ~ w'"h r
ct main upoH the aench drd such oni
,e would become g.ae ministers OF N
z law Is were insensible 70 defsmatio
It. and; CONTEMPT Gut happily for tn
,e good order Of societE men. an espe'
It. tally the people Of ifhif country. Al
to generally disposed i tOa fesoe~f an
Id abide the decieions. Of the tribunal
IS ofdaine+ nv goternment as the 90"
mon arbiters IT their rights. B.
&C. where isolated iindittdnals. In vioi'
IS ton of the better instincts OF huma
a nature and oisregardful Of law an
It. order. wontanly attempt to obstru<
Of tae course Of public justice by disr'
be sarding and exciting disrespect fe
nj the ,deeiAons rita, trituno 81, eye'
he.fgood citizen viii point them out,
in proper subjects for aeKal ~animAdve
sion
p A. court must naturally look first
,e. an enlightened and conservative ba
'u- governed by high sense OF proIe
r: sional ethics and deeply sensible.
d they always are. OF its necessity
cf,f aid in the maintenance Of public re
t. oxaini0xaa - -