Court Opinion

ID: 9776282
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 19:29:28.154154+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:36.567166
License: Public Domain

Steele Hays, Justice, dissenting. The majority opinion recognizes the inherent power of courts to punish for contempt, but limits that power to the courtroom. With that I disagree. I don’t suggest it extends to any great extent in time or distance from the courtroom, and this case does not require that we fix the outer boundaries. But this conduct occurred immediately after a hearing, immediately adjacent to the courtroom, and was prompted by what had just occurred in the courtroom and because of that it was a challenge to the legal process itself, not merely to the dignity of the court. Nor was there anything about this lawyer’s demeanor that warranted petitioners’ behavior, other than his representation of his client. I take no particular offense to the language used, though it was deliberately provocative, as both lawyers and judges ought to acquire skins thick enough to withstand verbal abuse, but when the conduct has implications of physical violence, as I believe this did, the court’s authority to protect litigants, jurors, witnesses, even lawyers, from intimidation, immediate and direct, ought to at least include the near proximity of the courtroom. Hickman, J., and Dudley, J., join in this dissent.