finding the notice apprised the defendant of the nature of the proceeding as contempt and the reason for the proceeding as violation of an order, regardless of the failure to specify that defendant was accused of thirty-seven different acts of contempt
How later courts described this case
- finding the notice apprised the defendant of the nature of the proceeding as contempt and the reason for the proceeding as violation of an order, regardless of the failure to specify that defendant was accused of thirty-seven different acts of contempt
- finding insufficient notice did not prejudice alleged contemnors who failed to advance any argument about defenses they would have mounted had they been given notice of the additional counts
- "It is . . . well settled that `judicial sanctions in civil contempt proceedings may, in a proper case, be employed for either or both of two purposes: to coerce the defendant into compliance with the court's order, and to compensate the complainant for losses sustained.'" (citing United Mine Workers, 330 U.S. at 303, 67 S.Ct. 677)
- "It is ... well settled that 'judicial sanctions in civil contempt proceedings may, in a proper case, be employed for either or both of two purposes: to coerce the defendant into compliance with the court's order, and to compensate the complainant for losses sustained.'" (citing United Mine Workers, 330 U.S. at 303)
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
W. Brown, J.,
concurs in paragraphs one .and two of the syllabus but dissents from paragraphs three and four of the syllabus and from the judgment.