Legal Opinion

Hancock v. Kennedy

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided April 9, 1918No. 9098PublishedCited by 6 opinions

ítule for contempt; .from Wilcox superior court—Judge Crum. June 18, 1917.

1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, J.

1. Proceedings for contempt are of two classes, punitive and remedial. A proceeding of the former class is intended to punish the offender for a past act of omission or commission which has disturbed the regular proceedings of the court, interfered with its proper func-' tioning, resisted its authority, or reflected contempt upon it, and the authorized penalty in such a case is that prescribed by section 4849 (5) of the Civil Code of 1910; the latter or remedial proceeding is instituted to preserve and enforce the rights of private parties, and may be resorted to as a means of compelling…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Tindall v. NisbetSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
  2. Cobb v. BlackSupreme Court of Georgia · 1865
  3. Drakeford v. AdamsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1896
  4. Ryan v. KingsberySupreme Court of Georgia · 1892

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Carey Canada, Inc. v. HinelyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1986
  2. Grantham v. Universal Tax Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1995
  3. Crute v. CruteCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1952
  4. Pullen v. ClecklerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1926
  5. Aiken v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1954

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API