Gordan v. Buckles

California Supreme Court

Gordan v. Buckles

28 P. 490, 92 Cal. 481, 1891 Cal. LEXIS 1235

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 28, 1891

DocketNo. 14588

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 28 P. 490 (Gordan v. Buckles) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gordan v. Buckles, 28 P. 490, 92 Cal. 481, 1891 Cal. LEXIS 1235 (Cal. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

McFarland, J.

This is a petition for a writ of pro-

hibition to restrain the respondent from proceeding to hear and determine a charge of an alleged contempt committed by petitioner by not appearing in person in the court of respondent on July 3, 1891, in response to an order to show cause. The facts are stated in the opinion of this court, this day rendered in Ex parte Gordan, ante, p. 478. The petition contains some matters referring to the respondent personally, the insertion of which was a violation of professional propriety by counsel for petitioner. All of the petition is stricken out except so much thereof as consists of a bare statement of the facts necessary to show the character of said order of July 3d, and the proposed action of the respondent thereunder.

Let a final writ issue prohibiting respondent from proceeding to punish petitioner for a contempt in not [482]*482appearing in verson before the court of respondent on July 3, 1891.

De Haven, J., Garoutte, J., Sharpstein, J., and Harrison, J., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

McFarland, J.

This is a petition for a writ of pro-

hibition to restrain the respondent from proceeding to hear and determine a charge of an alleged contempt committed by petitioner by not appearing in person in the court of respondent on July 3, 1891, in response to an order to show cause. The facts are stated in the opinion of this court, this day rendered in Ex parte Gordan, ante, p. 478. The petition contains some matters referring to the respondent personally, the insertion of which was a violation of professional propriety by counsel for petitioner. All of the petition is stricken out except so much thereof as consists of a bare statement of the facts necessary to show the character of said order of July 3d, and the proposed action of the respondent thereunder.

Let a final writ issue prohibiting respondent from proceeding to punish petitioner for a contempt in not [482]*482appearing in verson before the court of respondent on July 3, 1891.

De Haven, J., Garoutte, J., Sharpstein, J., and Harrison, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 P. 490, 92 Cal. 481, 1891 Cal. LEXIS 1235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gordan-v-buckles-cal-1891.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack