Legal Opinion
Roe v. Superior Court of San Francisco
California Supreme Court
Decided February 11, 1882No. 8,056PublishedCited by 11 opinions
Application for writ of certiorari. No briefs on file.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court:
We have examined the record in this matter, and are of opinion that the Court had jurisdiction of the subject-matter and the parties and regularly exercised its jurisdiction. Our examination must be confined to the record. We can go no further. The record in this proceeding for contempt before us is: 1. Affidavits of the facts constituting the contempt. (C. C. P., § 1211.) 2. Answer of Roe. (Id., § 1217.) 3d. Judgment adjudging Roe guilty of contempt.
The judgment states that the matter had been regularly heard, thus showing there was a trial.
It is contended that according to the…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Cooper v. People Ex Rel. WyattSupreme Court of Colorado · 1889
- State v. KnightSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1893
- Donovan v. Board of Police CommissionersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
- Borchard v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Lindsley v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.