Ex parte Tyler

Good Law
107 Cal. 78·1895 Cal. LEXIS 713·40 P. 33
Supreme Court of CaliforniaApril 5, 1895No. 21176California1,657 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

By the judgment of this court, made December 3, 1886, the petitioner was suspended from the right to practice law for the period of two years, and until the payment of a certain judgment against him in favor of J. M. Hogan. (In re Tyler, 71 Cal. 353 .) A motion made by him in 1889 for a modification of this judgment was denied. (In re Tyler, 78 Cal 307; 12 Am. St. Rep. 55 .) In October, 1894, the petitioner appeared in the superior court of Alameda county, Hon. John Ellsworth presiding, for the purpose of making a motion in a cause pending in said court, and was informed by the judge that he would not be permitted to make said motion or practice law in said court as an attorney until he should exhibit satisfactory proof that he had paid, or caused to be paid, the aforesaid judgment in favor ©f Hogan. The petitioner, however, insisted that he had a right to practice law and appear as an attorney in said court without making such proof, and thereupon, without leave of the court and in contempt of its authority, made a motion in said cause for which he was adjudged by the said court guilty of contempt, and was sentenced to pay a fine, and in default thereof to be imprisoned until the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.