Flash v. Holtsclaw

How courts have described this case

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

• holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney fees to petitioner in protective order litigation
• stating that previously ordered sixty-day suspended sentence was intended to coerce compliance with trial court's order and party given opportunity to purge itself of contempt by adhering to trial court's order; because party failed to do so, sentence could be ordered served
• approving of a sixty-day sentence for indirect civil contempt where the contemnor had repeatedly violated a protective order
• stating that previously ordered sixty-day suspended sentence was intended to coerce compliance with trial court's order and party given opportunity to purge itself of contempt by adhering to trial court's order; because party failed to do so, sentence could be ordered served
• upholding the imposition of sixty days of incarceration following repeated violations of a protective order, where the contemnor had harassed the aggrieved party by calling her, monitoring her activities, and disseminating information about her via the Internet, mail, and telephone
• civil contempt order held proper where ex-boyfriend violated protective order forbidding the dissemination of false information regarding ex-girlfriend

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).