Opinion ID: 466263
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Punitive Aspects of the Contempt Order

Text: 35 When cut to its core, the disputed contempt order appears designed solely to serve punitive ends. The purpose of a criminal contempt proceeding is the vindication of the court's authority by punishing for a past violation of a court order. 20 We can find no other purpose here. As we have already shown, the sanctions cannot be defended as either compensatory or remedial in nature. Rather, the sanctions were designed to punish Hicks for her violation of the December 7, 1983 order and, perhaps, for other behavior that the Trustee and the bankruptcy court found irritating, such as Hicks' persistent attempts to remove the automatic stay. With this punitive basis as the sole justification for its action, we find that the bankruptcy court exceeded its statutory authority in attempting to impose sanctions on Hicks for the alleged violation of the December 7 order.