Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Imboden v. Romines

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided August 30, 1988No. 54898PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SATZ, Judge.

Relator, Jeffrey Imboden, (Imboden) seeks our writ to prohibit the respondent judge from “enforcing sentences for contempt of court.” The specific relief Imbo-den actually seeks is for us to order respondent to vacate the sentences for contempt. This relief is more appropriately obtained by mandamus than prohibition. The procedural distinction between mandamus and prohibition, however, “is at best blurred, at worst nonexistent, and the subject matter to which the two writs apply overlap_” St. Louis Little Rock Hospital, Inc. v. Gaertner, 682 S.W.2d 146, 148 (Mo.App.1984). Thus,…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Malloy v. HoganSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
  3. Eugene Jerome Joseph Klein v. David Harris, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility, Robert Abrams, Attorney GeneralCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
  4. Smith v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  5. James H. Ellis, Jr. v. United States of America, Alfred M. Watkins v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1969

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Martin v. FlanaganSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
  2. State v. GarrettMissouri Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. State v. WilliamsMissouri Court of Appeals · 2012
  4. City of Springfield v. WeatherwaxMissouri Court of Appeals · 1992

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API