Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 1978–2023 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Cooke v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1978Punishment without issue or trial was so contrary to the usual and ordinarily indispensable hearing before judgment constituting due process that the assumption that the court saw everything that went on in open court was required to justify the exception; but the need for immediate penal vindication of the dignity of the court created it.” Cooke v. United States, 267 U.S. 517, 536 , 45 S.Ct. 390, 394 , 69 L.Ed. 767, 773-74 (1925). 1978Punishment without issue or trial was so contrary to the usual and ordinarily indispensable hearing before judgment constituting due process that the assumption that the court saw everything that went on in open court was required to justify the exception; but the need for immediate penal vindication of the dignity of the court created it.” Cooke v. United States, 267 U.S. 517, 536 , 45 S.Ct. 390, 394 , 69 L.Ed. 767, 773-74 (1925). | 2 | 3 |
Offutt v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1980Thus, with due regard to the traditional notions of due process, it is nevertheless recognized thát an ordered system of justice “require[s] such a summary dealing . [as] a mode of vindicating the majesty of law, in its active manifestation, against obstruction and outrage [to it,]. ...” Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 , 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 , 99 L.Ed. 11, 16 (1954). 1980Thus, with due regard to the traditional notions of due process, it is nevertheless recognized thát an ordered system of justice “require[s] such a summary dealing . [as] a mode of vindicating the majesty of law, in its active manifestation, against obstruction and outrage [to it,]. ...” Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 , 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 , 99 L.Ed. 11, 16 (1954). | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Wilsongreen2 sentences1978It is precisely because “the necessities of the administration of justice require such summary dealing . [as] a mode of vindicating the majesty of law, in its active manifestation, against obstruction and outrage to it,” Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 , 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 , 99 L.Ed. 11, 16 (1954), that the summary contempt power has been upheld against due process attacks, see, e. g., Cooke v. United States, supra, 267 U.S. at 534 , 45 S.Ct. 390 , 69 L.Ed. at 773 ; Ex parte Terry, 128 U.S. 289 , 9 S.Ct. 77 , 32 L.Ed. 405 (1888), and we therefore decline to adopt appellant’s argument tha 1978It is precisely because “the necessities of the administration of justice require such summary dealing . [as] a mode of vindicating the majesty of law, in its active manifestation, against obstruction and outrage to it,” Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 , 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 , 99 L.Ed. 11, 16 (1954), that the summary contempt power has been upheld against due process attacks, see, e. g., Cooke v. United States, supra, 267 U.S. at 534 , 45 S.Ct. 390 , 69 L.Ed. at 773 ; Ex parte Terry, 128 U.S. 289 , 9 S.Ct. 77 , 32 L.Ed. 405 (1888), and we therefore decline to adopt appellant’s argument tha | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Marcone
green
2 sentences2023Id. [quoting Cooke v. United States, 267 U.S. 517 , 534, 536, 45 S.Ct. 390 (1925) (internal quotation marks omitted)]. 2023Id. [quoting Cooke v. United States, 267 U.S. 517, 534, 536 , 45 S.Ct. 390 (1925) (internal quotation marks omitted)]. | 4 | 2015–2023 |
Anderson v. Dunn
green
2 sentences1978It is precisely because “the necessities of the administration of justice require such summary dealing . [as] a mode of vindicating the majesty of law, in its active manifestation, against obstruction and outrage to it,” Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 , 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 , 99 L.Ed. 11, 16 (1954), that the summary contempt power has been upheld against due process attacks, see, e. g., Cooke v. United States, supra, 267 U.S. at 534 , 45 S.Ct. 390 , 69 L.Ed. at 773 ; Ex parte Terry, 128 U.S. 289 , 9 S.Ct. 77 , 32 L.Ed. 405 (1888), and we therefore decline to adopt appellant’s argument tha 1978It is precisely because “the necessities of the administration of justice require such summary dealing . [as] a mode of vindicating the majesty of law, in its active manifestation, against obstruction and outrage to it,” Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 , 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 , 99 L.Ed. 11, 16 (1954), that the summary contempt power has been upheld against due process attacks, see, e. g., Cooke v. United States, supra, 267 U.S. at 534 , 45 S.Ct. 390 , 69 L.Ed. at 773 ; Ex parte Terry, 128 U.S. 289 , 9 S.Ct. 77 , 32 L.Ed. 405 (1888), and we therefore decline to adopt appellant’s argument tha | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Ex Parte Terry
green
2 sentences1978It is precisely because “the necessities of the administration of justice require such summary dealing . [as] a mode of vindicating the majesty of law, in its active manifestation, against obstruction and outrage to it,” Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 , 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 , 99 L.Ed. 11, 16 (1954), that the summary contempt power has been upheld against due process attacks, see, e. g., Cooke v. United States, supra, 267 U.S. at 534 , 45 S.Ct. 390 , 69 L.Ed. at 773 ; Ex parte Terry, 128 U.S. 289 , 9 S.Ct. 77 , 32 L.Ed. 405 (1888), and we therefore decline to adopt appellant’s argument tha 1978It is precisely because “the necessities of the administration of justice require such summary dealing . [as] a mode of vindicating the majesty of law, in its active manifestation, against obstruction and outrage to it,” Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 , 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 , 99 L.Ed. 11, 16 (1954), that the summary contempt power has been upheld against due process attacks, see, e. g., Cooke v. United States, supra, 267 U.S. at 534 , 45 S.Ct. 390 , 69 L.Ed. at 773 ; Ex parte Terry, 128 U.S. 289 , 9 S.Ct. 77 , 32 L.Ed. 405 (1888), and we therefore decline to adopt appellant’s argument tha | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.