Legal Opinion
Matter of Scott
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided November 13, 1986No. 85-492PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ROGERS, Associate Judge:
Appellant Amelia Scott challenges an order of civil contempt issued against her by the Honorable Rufus King III, for refusing to undergo a urinalysis test based on her demeanor during her testimony as a government witness at a criminal trial. She contends that because the court’s power to punish for contempt is limited to situations where an individual has acted with willful disobedience and obstructed the orderly administration of justice, and because Judge King made no finding of incompetency, he acted outside the scope of his authority in this case. Amicus curiae,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. United Mine Workers of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Walker v. City of BirminghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- In Re BanksDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1973
- Matter of MarshallDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bethard v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- In Re BanksDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
- Oliver v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- Johnson v. Capital City Mortgage Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
- Bethard v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.