Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 476.130 (2026)

May be punished summarily, when

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  476.130.  May be punished summarily, when. — Contempt committed in the immediate view and presence of the court may be punished summarily; in other cases the party charged shall be notified of the accusation, and have a reasonable time to make his defense.

­­--------

(RSMo 1939 § 2030)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 1866; 1919 § 2361; 1909 § 3883

(1957) Conviction of defendant of contempt on charge that she negligently disobeyed orders of court as to children held improper because order allegedly disobeyed was one granting custody on certain conditions, and violation of condition could not be contempt and also because judgment was not responsive to charge. G....v.Souder (A.), 305 S.W.2d 883.

(1987) Dialogue between assistant county prosecutor to judge regarding alleged statement made by prosecutor to newspaper held to constitute indirect criminal contempt.  Judge's order placing prosecutor in contempt was in error finding prosecutor in contempt without having given prosecutor prior notice that such hearing would be conducted as required by this section. State ex rel. Shepherd v. Steeb, 734 S.W.2d 610 (Mo.App.W.D.).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1957–2011 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Burrell-El v. Autrey, 752 S.W.2d 895 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988).
State Ex Rel. Burrell-El v. Autrey, 752 S.W.2d 895 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 4× “uous or insolent behavior committed during its session, in its immediate view and presence, and directly tending to interrupt its proceeding or to impair the respect due its authority; (2) Any breach of the peace, noise or other disturbance directly tending to interrupt its…”
State Ex Rel. Tannenbaum v. Clark, 838 S.W.2d 26 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 3× “01(a); § 476.130, RSMo 1986. A contempt of court, although not a criminal prosecution in the usual sense, is a specific criminal offense, and the sentence or fine imposed is a judgment in a criminal case.”
Lake Thunderbird Prop. Owners Ass'n v. Lake Thunderbird, Inc., 680 S.W.2d 761 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “That the trial court was aware of its contempt powers is evident from the September 27, 1977, judgment, which expressly cites the defendants for contempt. *764 In cases of contempt not committed in the immediate view and presence of the court, the alleged contemnor is entitled…”
Jafarian-Kerman v. Jafarian-Kerman, 424 S.W.2d 333 (Mo. Ct. App. 1967). · cites it 3× “: “Contempt committed in the immediate view and presence of the court, may he punished summarily; in other cases the party charged shall be notified of the accusation, and have a reasonable time to make his defense”.”
State ex rel. Shepherd v. Steeb, 734 S.W.2d 610 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 3× “Section 476.130, RSMo.1986. In this case, there were no rights of a litigant under judgment or order of the court at issue and the judgment of contempt did not purport to coerce Shepherd to perform any act required by any judgment.”
Mary G v. Souder, 305 S.W.2d 883 (Mo. Ct. App. 1957). · cites it 2× “6 However, as exemplified by Section 476.130 which is declaratory of the common law, there is a basic and vital difference in the procedure to be followed with respect to direct and indirect contempts, in that a court may act ex mero motu and may punish and commit summarily an…”
Burton v. Everett, 845 S.W.2d 710 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “Burton’s service of the cross-motion on him by mailing a copy of it with her answer to his attorney was insufficient to confer jurisdiction on the trial court. Persons charged with indirect contempt (contempt committed outside the presence of the court) are entitled to notice…”
Kohlleppel v. Owens, 646 S.W.2d 860 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 3× “Section 476.130, RSMo 1978 provides that in cases of contempt not committed in the immediate view and presence of the court, the party charged shall be notified of the accusation and have a reasonable time to make his defense.”
Thornton v. Doyle, 969 S.W.2d 342 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 3× “2d at 517 ; See also Section 476.130 RSMo 1994. Although no court of this state has conferred upon an alleged contemnor all rights given to a criminal defendant or held that a contempt action is a criminal case, our courts “have long recognized that a criminal contempt…”
State v. Lee, 344 S.W.3d 865 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011). “01; sections 476.130 and 476.140 RSMo. See, e.”
Moore v. Buerger, 709 S.W.2d 125 (Mo. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 4× “We do not rest our decision on Judge Woodson’s view that the definition in the statute is comprehensive or conclusive on the power, and indeed, the duty, of a trial court to protect the court from acts of direct contempt involving matters such as unruly conduct or the…”
State ex rel. Cnty. of Lincoln v. Elliott, 713 S.W.2d 515 (Mo. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “Indirect contempt, under § 476.130, RSMo 1978 and Rule 36.01(b) requires notice, hearing and a reasonable time for the preparation of a defense.”
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.