Opinion

In re Sanford

  • 236 Mo. 665
  • 139 S.W. 376
  • 1911 Mo. LEXIS 223
Court
Supreme Court of Missouri
Filed
Jul 15, 1911
Status
Published
Author
Yalliant
On the bench
Brown, Ferriss, Graves, Kennish, Lamm, Who, Woodson, Yalliant
Cited by
14 cases

The opinion

YALLIANT, C. J.

In concurring in the very able opinion of my brother Woodson, I deem it proper to say that I do not understand the opinion as holding’ that the board of equalization is a court, or that it derives its authority to commit for contempt on the theory that it is a court. Its work, as is well said in the opinion, is judicial in its character, as all official work that requires the taking of evidence and the pronouncing of a legal conclusion is judicial in its character. But the board of equalization is an arm of the Legislative Department of the State Government, and has as much authority to enforce obedience to its lawful orders as if it were an arm of the Judicial Department. As an arm of the Legislative Department the board has no authority to adjudge one guilty of criminal contempt, but it has authority to adjudge him guilty of civil contempt and enforce obedience to its lawful orders. In the one case it is punishment for past conduct, in the other it is coercion to enforce obedience.

Woodson, Graves, Kennish and Brown, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.