VELMA B. GRANT, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
A. F. DUBBS, ET AL., APPELLEES

Fla. | 1933-01-18
108 Fla. 116 Florida Supreme Court (1933) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 145 So. 879
Cited by 1 case

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court denied a petition to remit a fine imposed for contempt, stating that the court no longer had jurisdiction to do so after the term in which the judgment was rendered had ended. The petitioner was advised to seek relief from the Board of Pardons.


Holding

No, the Florida Supreme Court does not have the authority to remit a fine imposed for contempt after the term of court in which the judgment was rendered has ended.


Key Quotes

“Said respondent in said contempt proceedings' has filed recently in this court a petition for the remission of said fine.”

Describes the action taken by the attorney seeking relief.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

An attorney was found in contempt of court and fined $100.00. He later filed a petition for remission of the fine, explaining his conduct and arguing …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

On September 17, 1928, this court entered an order adjudging Walter D. Payne, an attorney at law, licensed to practice before this court, in contempt of court, and imposed a fine in the sum of $100.00: Said respondent in said contempt proceedings' has filed recently in this court a petition for the remission of said fine. In this petition, an explanation is made of the conduct for which he was fined, and his reasons'therefore, which, if presented at the time, would in all likelihood, have satisfied the court that no contempt was intended, with the result that no fine would have been imposed. However, the term of court at which the contempt judgment was rendered has long since terminated and this court has no authority to now remit the fine im~ *117posed. The petitioner may apply for that purpose to the Board of Pardons. If the petitioner sees fit to pay the fine, or if he obtains a remission of said fine by the State Board of Pardons, in either event it is the order of the court that he will stand purged of the contempt. It is so ordered.

Davis, C. J. and Whitfield, Terrell, Brown and. Buford, J. J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Walker v. State, 124 Fla. 231 (Fla. 1936)
    …such suit to be awarded a peremptory writ conformable to such alternative writ proposed as would make the relief sought an efficient remedy for the default complained of on respondents’ part. Humphreys v. State, ex rel. Palm Beach Co., 108 Fla. 92, 145 Sou. Rep. 879, and similar cases. Affirmed. Whitfield, C. J., and Brown, J., concur. Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw