California Supreme Court, 1891

In re Vance

In re Vance
California Supreme Court · Decided March 7, 1891 · Sharpstein
88 Cal. 262; 26 P. 101; 1891 Cal. LEXIS 680

In re Vance

Opinion of the Court

Sharpstein, J.

This appeal is from a judgment in a

case of contempt, and the respondent moves to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that an appeal does not lie in such a case, because it is provided by the Code of Civil Procedure that the judgment and orders of the court or judge, made in cases of contempt, are final and conclusive.” In Tyler v. Connolly, 65 Cal. 30, the question is carefully considered, and the conclusion reached that no appeal lies from a judgment imposing a fine of more than three hundred dollars for a contempt of court, expressly overruling People v. O’Neil, 47 Cat. 109. Tyler v. Connolly, 65 Cal. 30, was followed in Sanchez v. Newman, 70 Cal. 210.

We see no ground for disturbing the rule laid down in Tyler v. Connolly, 65 Cal. 30.

Appeal dismissed.

McFarland, J., De Haven, J., Garoutte, J., Harrison, J., Paterson, J., and Beatty, C. J., concurred.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.