Court Opinion

ID: 9540323
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:14:42.811722+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:58:32.900622
License: Public Domain

*448Sutton, C. J.,
dissenting. It was adjudicated on demurrer and on the motion to quash in the superior court that the petition against Charles M. Kenimer Jr. charged and set up 238 separate acts of contempt against him. These rulings were not excepted to and became the law of the case in this respect, whether right or wrong. It appears from the record that the evidence upon the hearing authorized the finding that the respondent was guilty of contempt as charged in the petition filed against him. The judge of the superior court then imposed a fine of $50 and imprisonment of 5 days upon the respondent on each of the 238 contempt charges against him. If the respondent was guilty of 238 separate offenses of contempt, as was determined in this proceeding, then it would follow that the trial judge had the authority to punish him on each offense; and where the punishment imposed does not exceed that prescribed by law, I am inclined to believe this court cannot legally reverse or set the judgment of the trial judge aside on the ground that the sum total of the punishment was excessive, cruel, and unusual.
I concur in divisions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the majority opinion and dissent from the ruling in division 7 thereof.