From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Glenn Dale Ranches, Inc. v. Shaub

Supreme Court of Idaho
May 10, 1974
95 Idaho 853 (Idaho 1974)

Opinion

No. 11219.

May 10, 1974.

APPEAL FROM DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, TWIN FALLS COUNTY, THERON W. WARD, J.

T.V. Behm, Buhl, Webb, Pike, Burton Carlson, Twin Falls, for defendant-appellant.

Hepworth, Nungester Felton, John C. Hepworth, Buhl, for plaintiff-respondent.


This is an appeal from an order of the district court wherein the court held appellant Norris Shaub in contempt for violating a permanent injunction which prohibited appellant from diverting more than 10 miners inches of water from the Mendini Tunnel.

An order holding a person in contempt is not an appealable order under I.C. § 7-614. In Barnett v. Reed, 93 Idaho 319, 460 P.2d 744 (1969), this Court stated:

"While the order holding a person in contempt is not appealable under I.C. § 7-614, the writ of review has been recognized as a proper method by which the actions of a court in a contempt proceeding can be reviewed. Mathison v. Felton, 90 Idaho 87, 408 P.2d 457 (1965)." 93 Idaho at 321, 460 P.2d at 746.

Appellant may petition for a writ of review in accordance with the procedures set forth in I.C. § 7-201 et seq. See Dutton v. District Court of Third Judicial District, County of Owyhee, 95 Idaho 720, 518 P.2d 1182 (1974).

Appeal dismissed. No costs allowed.


Summaries of

Glenn Dale Ranches, Inc. v. Shaub

Supreme Court of Idaho
May 10, 1974
95 Idaho 853 (Idaho 1974)
Case details for

Glenn Dale Ranches, Inc. v. Shaub

Case Details

Full title:GLENN DALE RANCHES, INC., an Idaho corporation, Plaintiff-Respondent, v…

Court:Supreme Court of Idaho

Date published: May 10, 1974

Citations

95 Idaho 853 (Idaho 1974)
522 P.2d 61

Citing Cases

State v. Talmage

Yates, 227 F.2d at 848. A singular distinction between Yates and this case is that an order holding a person…

Shaub v. District Court of Fifth Judicial District

Thereafter Shaub was adjudicated in contempt of court for violation of that injunction, and an appeal…