Caro v. Maxwell
Supreme Court of Florida
This is an application to the Supreme Court for a mandamus. The facts are as follows: The petitioner states in his petition that he was served in June, 1888, with a rule from the Circuit Court of Escambia county, to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt for disregarding an injunction issued by such court; and after giving the proceedings on such rule states that the Circuit Judge, after hearing the evidence and argument of counsel, adjudged him to be guilty…
Read the full summary
This is an application to the Supreme Court for a mandamus. The facts are as follows: The petitioner states in his petition that he was served in June, 1888, with a rule from the Circuit Court of Escambia county, to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt for disregarding an injunction issued by such court; and after giving the proceedings on such rule states that the Circuit Judge, after hearing the evidence and argument of counsel, adjudged him to be guilty of violating the injunciion and imposed on him a fine of one hundred dollars and the costs. He further represents that he…
1Opinion of the Court
This Chief-Justice delivered the opinion of the court.
Application fora writ of mandamus to compel the Judge to approve an appeal bond in case of an appeal attempted to be taken by Caro, from an order adjudging him guilty of a contempt in violating au injunction issued by the court, and imposing a fine therefor.
An appeal will not lie in such case, a- matters of contempt of the authority of a court are entirely within the province of the court adjudging the same, and .not subject to be reviewed upon writ of error or appeal. Easton vs. The state, 39 Ala., 551; Ex-parte Summers, 5 Iredell, 149;…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Ex Parte KearneySupreme Court of the United States · 1822
- The People v. . SturtevantNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
- In Re: CooperSupreme Court of Vermont · 1859
- Easton v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1865
- M'Credie v. E. & R. SeniorNew York Court of Chancery · 1834
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Ex parte SeniorSupreme Court of Florida · 1896
- State Ex Rel. Continental Coal Co. v. BittnerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1926
- Palmer v. PalmerSupreme Court of Florida · 1891
- Neering v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1962
- Pennekamp v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1945
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.