Ex parte Whitmore
Utah Supreme Court
APPLICATION for a writ of habeas corpus in the supreme court to review a conviction for contempt and an attempted appeal theyefrom in the third district court, Hon. Charles S. Zane, judge. The following further facts are stated in addition to what is stated in the opinion: The suit of L. A. Scott Elliot v. George 0. Whitmore and another was instituted to adjudicate water rights in a certain stream.
Read the full summary
APPLICATION for a writ of habeas corpus in the supreme court to review a conviction for contempt and an attempted appeal theyefrom in the third district court, Hon. Charles S. Zane, judge. The following further facts are stated in addition to what is stated in the opinion: The suit of L. A. Scott Elliot v. George 0. Whitmore and another was instituted to adjudicate water rights in a certain stream. The cause was tried before Hon. H. P. Henderson and a decree rendered adjudging defendants to be the owners of all the waters of the stream. This decree was reversed on appeal and reported at 8…
1Opinion of the Court
MINER, J.:
The petitioner George C. Whitmore was adjudged guilty of a specific and willful contempt of the authority of’ the third district court in violating an injunction contained in a final decree in a case wherein one L. A. Scott Elliot was plaintiff and said George C. Whitmore and another were defendants.
Having been found guilty of such contempt, by the third district court, he was sentenced to pay to the people of the Territory of Utah a fine of 125 and the cost of the proceedings taxed at $159.80, and in default of the payment of said fine and costs, to be committed to the custody of…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Ex Parte TerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- In Re TylerSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Ex Parte KearneySupreme Court of the United States · 1822
- Hovey v. McDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co. v. McBrideSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Von Hake v. ThomasUtah Supreme Court · 1988
- Fisher v. McDanielWyoming Supreme Court · 1901
- Snow v. SnowUtah Supreme Court · 1896
- Utah Power & Light Co. v. Richmond Irr. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1932
- In re GrayeMontana Supreme Court · 1907
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.