People v. Kuhlman
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, directing imprisonment for contempt. William R. Daingerheld, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.
While the coroner of San Francisco was holding an inquest, the appellant was subpoenaed to appear at the inquest as a witness. He appeared, but refused to testify. Thereupon, the coroner, proceeding under sections 17 and 18 of “An act in relation to coroners in the city and county of San Francisco,” approved March 16, 1872 (Stats. 1871-72, p. 403), made an order which recited the facts, adjudged the appellant-guilty of contempt for not testifying, and ordered the sheriff to take the appellant before some police or superior judge to be punished for such contempt. The appellant was taken before…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Tyler v. ConnollyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- In re VanceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
3Cited by4 opinions
- City of Los Angeles v. GeigerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Gale v. Tuolumne County Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
- Abbott v. AbbottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914
- Butler v. ButlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967