State ex rel. Mechleny v. Jaynes

19 Neb. 697
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 15, 1886
StatusPublished

This text of 19 Neb. 697 (State ex rel. Mechleny v. Jaynes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Mechleny v. Jaynes, 19 Neb. 697 (Neb. 1886).

Opinion

Reese, J.

This cause was originally submitted upon an application for a writ of mandamus. The writ was allowed and an opinion written, which is reported ante p. 161.

Relator now files an information seeking to institute proceedings against respondent for contempt of court in not paying the costs of the mandamus proceeding. It is urged that the judgment of the court was that respondent perform the official duties imposed by law, the performance of which was sought to be coerced, and that he pay the costs taxed at $9.80. That the performance of a part of the judgment, viz., the performance of the official duty, can be coerced by proceedings as for contempt, and that therefore the whole of the judgment may be enforced by the same method.

The law provides a method for the enforcement of the payment of money judgments, and that method is the issuance of an execution. We know of no distinction between judgment for costs in mandamus and other cases.

The motion for the institution of proceedings for contempt is therefore denied.

Judgment ACCORDINGLY.

The other judges concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 Neb. 697, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-mechleny-v-jaynes-neb-1886.