The daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1906-1907, 1906-05-08

these tribunals # ns. y or the sup
port and Urese.S ati3o of their respe:.
liability and independence; it has ex- |
listed from the eacs.- :. 'ioi to wbie i
the annals OF iuii ,3rude ace eGtend |
end, except in a lew cases If Marty vlo.i
re it has been sanctioned and es-
tn ohed by the experience of sges."i
LORD Mayor of LOndon's case. 3 Will
sO1. 1eS; opinion o. Kent, C J.. in
the case of Yates, 4 Johns, 317; John
son v. The Commonwealth l Bibb 59Y.
At page S06 of Weeks on ATTORNEYS
I'd edition it IS said:
Language may be COMBINATIONS
W..ether written or spoken; and if in
the presence OF the court, notice is
not essential before punishment. and
scandalous and insulting matter in a
petition for rehearing is equivalent
| to the commission in open court of an
act constituting a contempt When
the language is capable of explana-
ton. and is explained. the proceedings
must be discontinued; but where it
is offensive and insulting per Sc. the
disavowal of an intention to commit
contempt may tend to excuse, but
4
notorious and public insult to a court
for which an attorney contumaciously
refused in any way to atone, he was
fined for contempt, and his authority
to practice revoked"
! Other authorities in line with these
we have mentioned are cited in the
note to re Cary, 10 Fed. 3d.. and in
% Cvc l. 20, where it is said that
Il or
\ sorting in pleadings, briefs. motions.
/ arguments, petitions for rehearing or
other papers fled in court insulting
or contemptucus language. rejecting
on the integrity Of the court.
BY using the objectionable language
stated respondent became guilty of
contempt which no construction OF
the wo~ds can excuse or nurge. His
disclaimer Of an Intentional disros-
Dect to the court may palHate but
cannot Justify charge which undcr
any explanation cannot De construed:
otherwise than as reflect ng on the in
teligence and motives Of the court,
and which could scarcely have been
made for any other purpose unless to
intimidate Or improperly influence our
decision
As We have seen. attorneys have
been severely punished for using Ian
guage in many instances not so rem
rehensi3le but IN view of the disa-
vowal in open court We nave cOnclud-
ed not to impose a penalty so harsh
as disharment or suspension from
practice. or fine or imprisonment.
Nor do We forge that On prnac~ibf.. :
aeGI,st the m'saOG itc- If att>rncvs
; litgants ought no. to BE punished cr
prevented from u.aintarrng in the
case all petitions, pleadings. and pa
pers essential 70 the preservation anG
enforcement of her rights
It IS ordered that the offensive pet
iilon be stricken from tie, files. tha'
respondent stand reDrImanded anc
warned. and tnat he pay the costs Of
this proceeding.
an attempt TO shield its receiver anC
his attorneys from an investigation
Of charges OF gross misconduct in OF
e fee and containing the statement tha
we must decline 10 assume the
functions Of a grand jury or attemn
10 perform the duty OF the court il
investigating the conduct Of It's off
. GERS. was held TO be ccntemptuous
Il =. 01t.
E In re Terry. So Fed. 40 an extrem
Z case, for charging the court with hay
: Court deemed the language contempt
:. uous. the said language be strckeI
i out Of his petition.
5 Respondent not only contended an,
: said that he had no intention "a b.
= disrespectful or conremrrn0us hut b
t also earnestly contended that the lar
:. guage charged against him and whic
: ing was based, was. IN my opinion
o cCntemptu0us: and moved that If III
d he admitted having used was not dis
s oath to faithfully discharge the dr
o ties Of an attorney ana counCellr
a Surely sucn a course as was taken i
l. this case is not in compliance W
l. that duty. In Friediander Y. eumne
G. & S. NJ Co, 81 al. III. The coul
e said.
o If unfortunately counsel in an,
case shall ever So far forget l.msc
e as Willfully TO employ Language man
ID festiy disrespectful to the Judge Of Ii
IS superior cOurt-a thing not TO be al
CT ticipaJed-we shall deem it our dut
e. to treat such conduct as a CONTEMPT
~ this court. and TO proceed accordin
le ": and the briefs OF the case Wei
N ordele to be strlohe1 from the flies
le In t. > V. Late CORPORATION {
C. Church Of Jesus Chiis- If Later tt
70 Sairts. language used in the nelitiC
Id warned. and hat he pay the costs
No