(DOWNLOAD) "Haggerty v. Foster" by Mississippi Supreme Court # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Haggerty v. Foster
- Author : Mississippi Supreme Court
- Release Date : January 05, 2002
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 66 KB
Description
Direct Contempt — Attorneys — Jurisdiction — Minutes of Court Import Verity — Certiorari — Function of Writ. Certiorari — Function of Writ. 1. On application for a writ of certiorari directed to the district court, the question for determination is whether the court exceeded its jurisdiction in rendering the judgment complained of; the writ cannot be used to correct errors within jurisdiction. Contempt — Attorneys — Punishment — Record — Court Minutes — Sufficiency to Show Jurisdiction in Case of Direct Contempt. 2. Minute entry of respondent district court certified to the supreme court as part of the record on certiorari to review its action in adjudging an attorney guilty of a direct contempt, setting forth that contemnor, though repeatedly but ineffectually ordered to desist from pursuing a certain line of argument to the jury, persisted, and said "in an insolent, contemptuous and insulting manner Page 95 and in extreme anger: `Surely, the court knows the merest elementary rules of law," followed by the remark, "The court cannot intimidate me," held a sufficient "shorthand statement" of facts to clothe the court with jurisdiction to impose punishment, as against the contention that the recital was one of conclusions and not facts; held, further, that, under the circumstances, the utterances were contemptuous. Same — Attorneys — What may Constitute Direct Contempt. 3. Insolence to a judge by an attorney in open court by insulting words or conduct, or any adverse comments upon his decision, constitute contempt. Same — Certiorari — Court Minutes Import Verity. 4. District court minutes certified to the supreme court in a proceeding in certiorari to review a judgment in contempt import absolute verity; the supreme court in such a case must assume that the contemnors manner in addressing the court was as set forth therein, the language employed and the surrounding circumstances considered. Same — Attorneys — Wrongful Rulings of Court not Justification for Misconduct. 5. While wrongful rulings of the court or remarks to counsel do not justify misconduct of counsel amounting to contempt, it would seem that a judge ought to be patient and to tolerate that which appears but a momentary outbreak of disappointment on part of counsel. Same — Attorneys — Direct Contempt — Granting Contemnor Opportunity to Explain Conduct Within Courts Discretion. 6. Where a contempt is committed by an attorney in open court, it lies within the sound discretion of the court whether it shall inflict punishment at once or shall afford the contemnor, before pronouncing judgment, an opportunity to explain or excuse his conduct, or to show that no contempt was intended, and thus purge himself, though it would appear the part of wisdom, except in unusual cases, to ask for an explanation and afford such opportunity.