Mabry v. Howington’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he terms “criminal contempt” and “civil contempt” refer to the nature of the proceedings and the nature of the sentence meted out. A case tried under all the rules for criminal proceedings, in which the defendant is given all of the criminal due process, and sentenced to a certain term in jail, is clearly a criminal contempt case, even though the act of contempt is the violation of an injunction in a civil case. Likewise, if the case is tried under ordinary civil procedure, and the court orders the defendant to jail until he complies with the decree, the contempt proceeding is clearly a civil one. D. Dobbs, Law of Remedies 97 (1973). Since Mabry’s confinement was punitive in nature, then Howington had to prove his case beyond a reasonable doubt. Miss.Code Ann. § 11-51-11(4) (Supp. 1990). See also Varvaris v. State, 512 So.2d 886 (Miss.1987) (each element of criminal contempt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt); Cook v. State, 483 So.2d 371, 374 (Miss.1986) (same).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Pierpont v. Bond