§ 4136. Rights of persons charged with certain indirect criminal contempts.
(a) General rule.--A person charged with indirect criminal contempt for violation of a restraining order
or injunction issued by a court shall enjoy:
(1) The rights to bail that are accorded to persons accused of crime.
(2) The right to be notified of the accusation and a reasonable time to make a defense,
if the alleged contempt is not committed in the immediate view or presence of the
court.
(3) (i) Upon demand, the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the judicial
district wherein the contempt is alleged to have been committed.
(ii) The requirement of subparagraph (i) shall not be construed to apply to contempts:
(A) Committed in the presence of the court or so near thereto as to interfere directly
with the administration of justice, or to apply to the misbehavior, misconduct, or
disobedience of any officer of the court in respect to the writs, orders, or process
of the court.
(B) Subject to 23 Pa.C.S. § 6114 (relating to contempt for violation of order or agreement).
(C) Subject to 75 Pa.C.S. § 4108(c) (relating to nonjury criminal contempt proceedings).
(4) The right to file with the court a demand for the withdrawal of the judge sitting
in the proceeding, if the alleged contempt arises from an attack upon the character
or conduct of such judge, and if the attack occurred otherwise than in open court.
Upon the filing of any such demand, the judge shall thereupon proceed no further but
another judge shall be designated by the court. The demand shall be filed prior to
the hearing in the contempt proceeding.
(b) Punishment.--Except as otherwise provided in this title or by statute hereafter enacted, punishment
for a contempt specified in subsection (a) may be by fine not exceeding $100 or by
imprisonment not exceeding 15 days in the jail of the county where the court is sitting,
or both, in the discretion of the court. Where a person is committed to jail for the
nonpayment of such a fine, he shall be discharged at the expiration of 15 days, but
where he is also committed for a definite time, the 15 days shall be computed from
the expiration of the definite time.
(Apr. 28, 1978, P.L.202, No.53, eff. 60 days; Dec. 20, 1982, P.L.1409, No.326, eff.
60 days; Dec. 19, 1990, P.L.1240, No.206, eff. 90 days)
Cross References. Section 4136 is referred to in sections 62A14, 62A15 of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Commonwealth v. McMullen, 961 A.2d 842 (Pa. 2008).
· cites it 14× “Consequently, 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136(a)(3)® is unconstitutional since it purports to grant a procedural right to a jury trial in all indirect criminal contempt cases involving the violation of a restraining order or injunction.”
Crozer-Chester Med. Ctr. v. Moran, 560 A.2d 133 (Pa. 1989).
· cites it 4× “See 42 Pa.C.S. section 4136, supra. A finding of criminal contempt is a finding of a specific offense for which a sanction is imposed that does not seek compliance but is a specific punishment for an act done.”
L & J Equip. Co. v. United Mine Workers, 488 A.2d 303 (Pa. 1985).
· cites it 6× “The procedural protections applicable in an indirect criminal contempt proceeding for violation of an injunction are set forth in 42 Pa.Cons. Stat. § 4136, which provides: § 4136.”
Simpson v. Allstate Ins., 504 A.2d 335 (Pa. 1986).
· cites it 2× “The order holding him in contempt and imposing a fine of $3,000, costs and interest, came without warning in response to a petition to open [2] a judgment which the trial court had previously entered.”
Richland Twp. v. Prodex, Inc., 646 A.2d 652 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1994).
· cites it 2× “The new matter, alleged inter alia, that the contempt proceedings were in the nature of a criminal contempt, subject to certain statutory requirements, and demanded a jury trial pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136. At a hearing scheduled for August 24, 1993, Prodex was to “show cause…”
Fiore v. Oakwood Plaza Shopping Ctr., Inc., 585 A.2d 1012 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1991).
“On October 10, 1989, the defendants filed a motion for reconsideration of the October 2nd order on the ground that, inter alia, they were guilty of no more than indirect criminal contempt warranting, under 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136(b), a maximum fine of $100.”
Commonwealth v. McMullen, 881 A.2d 841 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2005).
· cites it 3× “See 42 Pa. C.S. section 4136, supra. A finding of criminal contempt is a finding of a specific offense for which a sanction is imposed that does not seek compliance but is a specific punishment for an act done.”
Vito v. Vito, 551 A.2d 573 (Pa. 1988).
“2 He was accused via petition filed by his wife, containing averments that he had violated the protection order by acts of domestic violence. This petition was filed consistently with Section 10 of the Protection from Abuse Act which provides that “[u]pon violation of a…”
Trinity Lutheran Evangelical Church v. May, 537 A.2d 38 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988).
“Trinity bases its claim of a right to a jury trial on 42 Pa. C. S. §4136(a)(3)(i) which provides as follows: *565 (a) General rule.”
Borough of Beaver v. Steckman, 728 A.2d 418 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1999).
“If the proceeding were construed to be criminal in nature, the applicable statutory provision would be Section 4136(a) of the Judicial Code, as amended, 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136(a), relating to the rights of persons charged with indirect criminal contempt for violation of a restraining…”
Commonwealth ex rel. Roth v. Kozakiewicz, 485 A.2d 843 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1984).
· cites it 2× “Counsel appears to acknowledge that such impotence cannot be the case; he therefore grants that the courts may imprison under civil contempt orders but only after affording a jury trial when requested, under 42 Pa. C. S. §4136. However, as noted above, that provision of the…”
Crozer-Chester Med. Ctr. v. Moran, 533 A.2d 1045 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1987).
“Moran, however, argues that by not placing conditions on payment of the fine, he was subject to penalties for criminal contempt and, therefore, the requirements of 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136 apply. I agree, and for that reason dissent.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4136(3) — 1 case
Commonwealth ex rel. Roth v. Kozakiewicz, 485 A.2d 843 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1984).
“Counsel appears to acknowledge that such impotence cannot be the case; he therefore grants that the courts may imprison under civil contempt orders but only after affording a jury trial when requested, under 42 Pa. C. S. §4136. However, as noted above, that provision of the…”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4136(a) — 4 cases
L & J Equip. Co. v. United Mine Workers, 488 A.2d 303 (Pa. 1985).
“The procedural protections applicable in an indirect criminal contempt proceeding for violation of an injunction are set forth in 42 Pa.Cons. Stat. § 4136, which provides: § 4136.”
Borough of Beaver v. Steckman, 728 A.2d 418 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1999).
“If the proceeding were construed to be criminal in nature, the applicable statutory provision would be Section 4136(a) of the Judicial Code, as amended, 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136(a), relating to the rights of persons charged with indirect criminal contempt for violation of a restraining…”
Commonwealth v. McMullen, 881 A.2d 841 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2005).
“See 42 Pa. C.S. section 4136, supra. A finding of criminal contempt is a finding of a specific offense for which a sanction is imposed that does not seek compliance but is a specific punishment for an act done.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4136(a)(1) — 1 case
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4136(a)(3) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. McMullen, 961 A.2d 842 (Pa. 2008).
“Consequently, 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136(a)(3)® is unconstitutional since it purports to grant a procedural right to a jury trial in all indirect criminal contempt cases involving the violation of a restraining order or injunction.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4136(a)(3)(i) — 2 cases
Commonwealth v. McMullen, 961 A.2d 842 (Pa. 2008).
“Consequently, 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136(a)(3)® is unconstitutional since it purports to grant a procedural right to a jury trial in all indirect criminal contempt cases involving the violation of a restraining order or injunction.”
Trinity Lutheran Evangelical Church v. May, 537 A.2d 38 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988).
“Trinity bases its claim of a right to a jury trial on 42 Pa. C. S. §4136(a)(3)(i) which provides as follows: *565 (a) General rule.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4136(b) — 5 cases
Commonwealth v. McMullen, 961 A.2d 842 (Pa. 2008).
“Consequently, 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136(a)(3)® is unconstitutional since it purports to grant a procedural right to a jury trial in all indirect criminal contempt cases involving the violation of a restraining order or injunction.”
Fiore v. Oakwood Plaza Shopping Ctr., Inc., 585 A.2d 1012 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1991).
“On October 10, 1989, the defendants filed a motion for reconsideration of the October 2nd order on the ground that, inter alia, they were guilty of no more than indirect criminal contempt warranting, under 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136(b), a maximum fine of $100.”
L & J Equip. Co. v. United Mine Workers, 488 A.2d 303 (Pa. 1985).
“The procedural protections applicable in an indirect criminal contempt proceeding for violation of an injunction are set forth in 42 Pa.Cons. Stat. § 4136, which provides: § 4136.”
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.