Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-04-21

|
| ressions at every adverse ruling un-
| Al it become the courts clear duty
check the habit by the severe les
on of a punishment for contempt
| The single insulting expression for
! hich the court punisnes may there
ore seem to those knowing nothing OF
| he prior conduct OF the attorney. ana
| looking only at the single remark, a
natter which might wei be unnotic-
! ed and yet if all the conduct of the
| attorney was known. the duty of in
/ reference and punis ment might be
| clear
/ We remark finally, that while from
he very nature of things the power
of court TO punish for contempt is
vast power, and one which, in the
hands of a corrupt or unworthy Judge
may he used tyrannically and unjust
| ly, yet protection TO individuals lies
| in the publicity of all judicial pro-
ceeL ngs, and the appeal which may
be made to the legislature for pro-
| proceedings against any Judge who
| proves himself unworthy of the power
! intrusted to hir..'
! Where a contention arose between
! counsel as to whether witness had
/ not already answered a certain ques-
! ton. and the court after hearing the
| renOrter's notes read decided that
, she had answered it. whereupon one
Of the attorneys sprang 70 his feet.
and turning to the court, sad. in a
loud tone and insulting manner:
She has not answered the question
held that the attorney was guilty of
J contempt regardless of the question
/ wnpther the decision of e court Was
right or wrong" Russell V. Circuit
Judge 81 Iowa, 1912.
In Sears V. Starbird. Is Cal. 81,
Am St 1z3, a brief rejecting upon
the trial Judge was stricken from the
record in the Supreme Court, because
il contained the following:
"Thn court out o. fullness of his
love for a cause, the parLieS 70 il or
their counsel or from an OverZea'ous
desire to adjudicate all matters. points
arguments and things could not. witt
any degree of propriety under the law
patch and doctor up the cause of the
plain ifs, whicD. perhaps. the care,
lessness of their counsel haG left il
such a condition as TO entitle them u
no relief whatever
J IN reference to this language it wa
said in the opinion:
- ere is a net in+imation tina
the Judge of .-e court below did no
: act rom proper motives. but from
4 lo-n Of the parties or their counsel
D We see nothing IN lie record whlc
e suggests that such was the case. o
t the contrary. e action complained c
e seems to us 10 have been enurel,
r prODer: See Sill Y. Reese. Al Cal. 34'
e The brief. therefore contains groun,
o less Cargo against the purity Of nc
!, tive of the nudge Ct the court below
l. This we regard as grave breach c
< professional Dropriety. Every perso
a on his admission TO the bar takes a
: oath to faithfully discharge the d,
d ties of an attorney ana cnuncelcr
e Surely sucu a course as was taken
It this case is not in compliance W
IF that duty. In Friedlander V. SUNNI
ID G. { S. NJ. Co, 61 al. IL. The cou
s. said:
C. If unfortunately counsel in an
IF case shall ever SO far forget hinSc
IS as willfully to employ Language mar
d testify disrespectful to the Judge Of q
V. superior court-a thing not to be a
If ticipa, ed-we shall deem it cur du
q to treat such conduct as contempt
l.
q ly; and the briefs of the case We
g, ordered to be STRICKEN from the flies
! In Y. 5. V, Late Corporation
ut Church of Jesus Chtis- Ct Later +;
lie Saints. language used in the petite
n filed in effect accusing the court
Id an attempt to shield its receiver al
j his attorneys from an investigate
IN of charges OF gross misconduct in
T, flee and containing the statement tn
el we must decline to assume Il
til funct.o of a grand jury, or attem
e. to perform the duty of the court
ne investigating the conuuct of its OF
n. GERS. was held to be contemptuou
211 P. 5I9.
st In re Terry, Sc Fed 419 an extrer
err case. for charging the court with ha
ge inc peen bribed resisting rcrncv
as from the court room by the marsh
Oh acting under an order from the benz
is and using abusive language. one
N, the defendants was sent to Jail i
Dr. thirty days and the other for
be months. Judge cry. who had n
IN made any accusation against I
se court sought release and to be pun
is ed Of the contempt by sworn pet
or ion in which he alleged that in I
lie transaction ne ala not nave tHS SIG
ht est idea of showing any disrespect
N the court 1t was held that this COZ
re- not avail or relieve him and it W
lis said:
Ill 'The law imputes an intent to
IS ccmplish the natural result OF on
he acts. and when those acts are OF
he criminal nature, it will not acce'
or against such implication the denial
tn the transgressor. No one would
he safe if a denial or a wrongful or crll
of nal intent would suffice to realise
OF violator from the Punishment due
rlf- his offenses."
en- In an application for writ Of
ley beas corpus growing out of that ca
full Justice Harlan, speaking for the
his preme court of the United States 50
is eve have seen that it is settl
so doctrine in the Jurisprudence both
he England and of this country. ne'