From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fireman v. Smith

Supreme Court of Illinois
Oct 25, 1930
173 N.E. 64 (Ill. 1930)

Opinion

No. 19975. Order reversed.

Opinion filed October 25, 1930.

WRIT OF ERROR to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. GEORGE B. HOLMES, Judge, presiding.

OSSIAN CAMERON, and EDWARD H.S. MARTIN, for plaintiff in error.

ISADORE WOLFSOHN, (HARRY J. FIREMAN, pro se,) for defendant in error.


The municipal court of Chicago, in a supplementary proceeding under section 64 of the Municipal Court act, ordered Oliver F. Smith to assign and transfer to the bailiff of that court certain choses in action to be sold by the bailiff at public sale and the proceeds applied toward the satisfaction of a judgment theretofore recovered by William Hughes against Smith. The order was not obeyed, Smith was adjudged in contempt of court, and sentenced to the county jail. By this writ of error he seeks a reversal of the later order.

The facts in the case are set forth in Fireman v. Smith, ( ante, p. 138,) and need not be repeated. It was there decided that the municipal court had no authority to require the plaintiff in error to make the particular assignment to the bailiff and that the order, for that reason, was void. A person is not guilty of contempt of court for disobedience of an order which the court had no jurisdiction to make. Steenrod v. Gross Co. 334 Ill. 362; People v. Brautigan, 310 id. 472; People v. Kowalski, 307 id. 378; People v. Spain, 307 id. 283.

The order of the municipal court adjudging the plaintiff in error in contempt of court is reversed.

Order reversed.


Summaries of

Fireman v. Smith

Supreme Court of Illinois
Oct 25, 1930
173 N.E. 64 (Ill. 1930)
Case details for

Fireman v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:HARRY J. FIREMAN, Defendant in Error, vs. OLIVER F. SMITH, Plaintiff in…

Court:Supreme Court of Illinois

Date published: Oct 25, 1930

Citations

173 N.E. 64 (Ill. 1930)
173 N.E. 64

Citing Cases

People v. Adams

We do not think so. A person is not guilty of contempt of court for disobedience of an order which the court…

Lurie Co. v. Teichner

• 3 A person cannot be guilty of contempt of court for disobedience of an order which the trial court had no…