State v. Rudolph

5 Citing cases

  1. Montgomery v. Polk County

    278 N.W.2d 911 (Iowa 1979)   Cited 13 times
    In Montgomery, the Iowa Supreme Court held that the discovery rule did not apply to cases under the Iowa Municipal Tort Claims Act, Iowa Code § 613A (1977).

    . . ." The last statement was quoted with approval by our court in State v. Rudolph, 240 Iowa 726, 732, 37 N.W.2d 483, 487 (1949). In that case, property was attached, then sold.

  2. U.S. v. Brown

    835 F.2d 176 (8th Cir. 1987)   Cited 14 times

    However, the Supreme Court of Iowa has held that execution is not the exclusive method of enforcing judgments; if the funds are in the custody of the court, the court may simply apply them in satisfaction of the judgment. State v. Rudolph, 240 Iowa 726, 37 N.W.2d 483 (1949); Hornish v. Ringen Stove Co., 116 Iowa 1, 89 N.W. 95 (1902); see also Heiserman, Procedures Available for Implementation of a Judgment in Iowa, 42 Iowa L.Rev. 265, 273 (1957) ("Money in the hands of the clerk is subject to summary order of the court, on motion in the proceeding out of which the money came, or by a new application; no execution need be issued to effect its appropriation by the party entitled thereto.") D.

  3. State ex rel. Koppers Co. v. International Union of Oil Chemical & Atomic Workers

    171 W. Va. 290 (W. Va. 1982)   Cited 23 times
    Discussing role of prosecuting attorney

    G.K. Wright, et al. "Civil and Criminal Contempt in Federal Courts," 17 F.R.D. 167, 172 (1955). As for state courts, I would add (alphabetically) the voices of the courts of Georgia, Welborn v. Mize, 107 Ga. App. 427, 130 S.E.2d 623 (1963); Iowa, State v. Rudolph, 240 Iowa 726, 37 N.W.2d 483 (1949); Massachusetts, Katz v. Commonwealth, 379 Mass. 305, 399 N.E.2d 1055 (1979); Mississippi, Melvin v. State, 210 Miss. 132, 48 So.2d 856 (1950); Missouri, Popsicle Corporation v. Pearlstein, 168 S.W.2d 105 (Mo.App. 1943); Oregon, State ex rel. Johnson v. Schwartz, 23 Or. App. 270, 542 P.2d 153 (1975); and Wisconsin, Wisconsin Employment Relations Bd. v. Allis-Chalmers Workers' Union, Local 248, 249 Wis. 590, 25 N.W.2d 425 (1946), to the chorus of support for the proposition that criminal contempts need not be prosecuted by state prosecuting attorneys. The authority supporting my dissent, therefore, does not, as the majority opinion might indicate, merely amount to a desultory barbershop quartet, but rather to a full choir, led by one of our greatest soloists, Judge Learned Hand. This chorus is not mere sound and fury, either.

  4. Sarich v. Havercamp

    203 N.W.2d 260 (Iowa 1972)   Cited 2 times
    Finding the district court erred in refusing jury trial demand for contempt proceedings in which alleged contemptor "was exposed to a fine of $14,000 maximum or imprisonment for a maximum term of 14 years"

    A reading of section 153.33, The Code, 1971, and sub-section three thereof, is conclusive in this area of concern. In this connection, see State v. Rudolph, 240 Iowa 726, 730, 37 N.W.2d 483, 486, where this court said, "We said in the early case of The First Congregational Church of Bloomington v. City of Muscatine, 2 Iowa 69, 71: `* * * The proceeding to punish a contempt of process, though based upon, is merely incidental to, and to a great extent independent of, the original proceeding in which it may be invoked. Indeed, such proceeding need not be entitled as of the original cause * * *.'" We conclude therefore there was no error on the part of the trial court in permitting the substitution of the Iowa state board of dentistry as plaintiff in the contempt proceedings.

  5. Davis v. Rudolph

    52 N.W.2d 15 (Iowa 1952)   Cited 6 times

    Davis appealed, and this court reversed the judgment of the district court, with directions to reinstate the cause and require Rudolph to show cause why he should not be held in contempt. State v. Rudolph, 240 Iowa 726, 37 N.W.2d 483. September 10, 1949, the district court ordered Rudolph to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court. Apparently the show-cause hearing was had October 8, 1949.