Ex Parte Shaklee

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that contempt order was void because it failed to specify how many separate violations occurred and whether the thirty-day sentences are to run concurrently or consecutively
• holding that contempt order was void because it failed to specify how many separate violations occurred and whether the thirty-day sentences are to run concurrently or consecutively
• holding that contempt order was void because it failed to specify how many separate violations occurred and whether the thirty-day sentences are to run concurrently or consecutively
• stating sheriff must be able to determine from order how long contemnor was to remain in jail
• stating sheriff must be able to determine from order how long contemnor was to remain in jail
• requiring order to identify date contempt findings and imposes a different punishment. of each violation found to constitute contempt

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).