Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 7-603 (2026)

Contempt in presence of court — Punishment. 

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Contempt in presence of court — Punishment. 

When a contempt is committed in the immediate view and presence of the court, or judge at chambers, it may be punished summarily; for which an order must be made, reciting the facts as occurring in such immediate view and presence, adjudging that the person proceeded against is thereby guilty of a contempt, and that he be punished as therein prescribed. When the contempt is not committed in the immediate view and presence of the court, or judge at chambers, an affidavit shall be presented to the court or judge of the facts constituting the contempt, or a statement of the facts by the referees or arbitrators, or other judicial officer.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases, 1953–2007 · leading case: Matter of Williams, 817 P.2d 139 (Idaho 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Matter of Williams, 817 P.2d 139 (Idaho 1991). · cites it 20× “Idaho Code § 7-603 allows for direct contempt to be punished summarily, but it requires that an indirect contempt must be initiated by an affidavit.”
Marks v. Vehlow, 671 P.2d 473 (Idaho 1983). · cites it 4× “I.C. §§ 7-603, 7-611. At this point, we find no error in this initial ruling.”
Jones v. Jones, 428 P.2d 497 (Idaho 1967). · cites it 8× “I.C. § 7-603 provides that in such cases, "* * * When the contempt is not committed in the immediate view and presence of the court, or judge at chambers, an affidavit shall be presented to the court or judge of the facts constituting the contempt * * *.”
First Sec. Bank of Idaho, Na v. Hansen, 690 P.2d 927 (Idaho 1984). · cites it 5× “” However, before any contempt committed outside of the court’s presence may be punished, the requirements of I.C. § 7-603 must first be met. I.C. § 7-603 states the following: “Contempt in presence of court— Punishment.”
Ross v. Coleman Co., Inc., 761 P.2d 1169 (Idaho 1988). · cites it 2× “While those proceedings may be more summary in cases where the contempt was committed in the presence of the court, rather than outside the presence of the court, I.C. § 7-603, the proceeding is nevertheless *839 criminal in nature and minimal due process requirements must be…”
Nab v. Nab, 757 P.2d 1231 (Idaho Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “; see I.C. § 7-603. The initiating affidavit must allege that the contemnor or his attorney *516 has been served with or has actual knowledge of the order and that the order has been violated.”
Crooks v. Maynard, 718 F. Supp. 1460 (D. Idaho 1989). · cites it 8× “First, plaintiffs argue that defendant violated Idaho Code § 7-603 , which permits summary contempt proceedings only when the contempt is committed “in the immediate view and presence of the court, or judge at chambers.”
State v. Proud, 262 P.2d 1016 (Idaho 1953). · cites it 4× “The court has the authority to summarily punish a witness for contempt committed in the immediate view and presence of the court, section 7-603, I.C.; however, contempt proceedings in the presence of the jury might well be improper and prejudicial if such action is injurious to…”
State v. Schorzman, 924 P.2d 214 (Idaho 1996). · cites it 4× “See I.C. § 7-603. When the contempt is an indirect contempt, an affidavit must be presented to the court.”
In Re Contempt of Reeves, 733 P.2d 795 (Idaho Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “Idaho Code § 7-603 provides that in such cases "an affidavit shall be presented to the court or judge of the facts constituting the contempt.”
State v. Epperson, 950 P.2d 1244 (Idaho 1997). · cites it 4× “AFFIDAVIT REQUIREMENT Butler next argues that his failure to appear at the continued arraignment constituted indirect contempt which, under I.C. § 7-603, requires the filing of an affidavit.”
Steiner v. Gilbert, 159 P.3d 877 (Idaho 2007). · cites it 2× “The district court’s exercise of jurisdiction was proper, as Barnhill satisfied the requirements set forth in Idaho Code § 7-603 . B. Sufficiency of the description of the Road Steiner argues that because the Stipulated Judgment failed to set forth the specific location of the…”
Show all 18 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.