Supreme Court· 4/27/1988

Hicks Ex Rel. Feiock v. Feiock

Citations

485 U.S. 624
108 S. Ct. 1423
99 L. Ed. 2d 721
1988 U.S. LEXIS 1985
56 U.S.L.W. 4347

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the substance of the proceedings and the character of relief determines whether a contempt is of a civil or criminal nature
concluding that a determinate sentence with a purge clause constitutes relief that is civil in nature
holding that five consecutive sentences on five counts of contempt, suspended and three-year probation imposed, was not punitive sentence if contemnor had opportunity to purge by paying arrearage
holding that any sentence of confinement that is for a determinate period of time is criminal
recognizing that the “the critical feature[]” in determining whether a sanction is civil or criminal is “the character of the relief” at issue
stating that the substance of the proceeding, among other things, determines whether contempt is civil or criminal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: White, Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens, O'Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia, Kennedy

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

556 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

34 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Hicks Ex Rel. Feiock v. Feiock

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.