Simon

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of the United States for the Territory of Hawaii, adjudging defendant Sally Simon, alias (hereinafter called appellant), guilty of contempt of court.

The record shows the filing of a bill for injunction, under sections 22 and 24 of ;titlo 2, National Prohibition Act (sections 34 and 38, title 27, USCA), wherein appellant was accused of violating sections 21 and 23, title 2, National Prohibition Act (sections 33 and 35, title 27, USCA) in connection with premises at No. 1009 Third avenue in Honolulu. The bill was taken pro eonfesso upon default, and resulted, on January 13, 1930, in a permanent injunction, enjoining appellant from doing or committing the acts denounced by that portion of section 23, title 2, of the said act, which now appears as section 35, title 27, of the USCA. Thereafter, on June 10, 1931, an affidavit and a verified information were filed in the suit, charging appellant with four separate sales of intoxicating liquor at No-. 1428 Whitney street, Honolulu. Appellant was taken into custody under an attachment writ to answer for alleged contempt of court in violating said injunction. At the conclusion of the contempt…

On Petition for Rehearing.

In a petition for rehearing appellant calls attention to the ease of United States v. Fox, 60 F.(2d) 685 , decided by the Circuit Court of Appeals of the Second Circuit since the submission of this ease.

The Fox" Case and the ease; at bar are distinguishable. The former was a suit in equity brought by United States against Fox and others to enjoin a liquor nuisance; maintained at certain premises, and an appeal was taken directly from an order refusing to vacate a portion of the decree. In the case at bar, appellant was adjudged guilty of contempt of court for violating an injunction issued in a suit in equity brought by the United States against her and restraining her from doing and committing any of the acts set forth in section 2-3, title 2, National Prohibition Act (section 35, title 27, USCA). No objection was made in the District Court to the bill, or the temporary or final injunctions issued upon it. The appellant was served with both injunctions, violated same, and contempt proceedings followed. She now seeks to collaterally attack the final injunction, which may not be done. Howat v. Kansas, 258 U. S. 181, 189 , 42 S. Ct. 277 , 66 L. Ed. 550…