Legal Opinion
Gaston v. Shunk Plow Co.
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided November 14, 1925No. 4986PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHines, J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.)
It has been held by this court that a traverse of an answer to a proceeding for criminal contempt, committed out of the presence of the court, is not required, and that the court can proceed to determine in the usual way whether the facts show that the party charged is guilty of disobedience of the order of the court. Carson v. Ennis, 146 Ga. 726 (92 S. E. 221, L. R. A. 1917E, 650). We can see no reason why the same principle is not applicable in a remedial proceeding for contempt. While this court in the ease cited did not refer to the provisions of §§…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. WrightSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
- In re FiteCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1912
- Tindall v. NisbetSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
- Carson v. EnnisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1917
- Lamar v. AllenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1942
- Connell v. ConnellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1966
- Trimble v. American Savings Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1986
- Goodrum v. GoodrumSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
- Ogletree v. WatsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1967
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.