State v. Miller

326 N.W.2d 680, 212 Neb. 864, 1982 Neb. LEXIS 1311
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 24, 1982
DocketNo. 81-853
StatusPublished

This text of 326 N.W.2d 680 (State v. Miller) 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 v. Miller, 326 N.W.2d 680, 212 Neb. 864, 1982 Neb. LEXIS 1311 (Neb. 1982).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

According to our previous definition of contempt advanced by this court in In re Contempt of Potter, 207 Neb. 769, 301 N.W.2d 560 (1981), a finding must be made that an attorney’s failure to appear at a designated time was willful in order to hold him or her in contempt. In the instant case the trial court found that the failure to appear was not willful behavior on the part of the appellant. Therefore, the trial court was not justified in holding the appellant in contempt of court. The judgment of the trial court is in all respects reversed.

Reversed.

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

Related

In Re Contempt of Potter
301 N.W.2d 560 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
326 N.W.2d 680, 212 Neb. 864, 1982 Neb. LEXIS 1311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-miller-neb-1982.