LeMay v. Leander

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a violation of an injunction, by definition, is the functional equivalent of contempt
• concluding that a violation of an injunction, by definition, is the functional equivalent of contempt
• stating that the credibility of the witnesses and weight of the evidence fall within the province of the trier of fact
• stating that “it is within the province of the trier of fact to weigh the evidence and to assess the credibility of the witnesses, and this court will refrain from interfering in those determinations”
• noting that, “[although the power to punish for contempt is an inherent power of the courts, the legislature may establish alternative procedures and penalties that do not unduly restrict or abrogate the court’s contempt power”
• observing that requirements of particularity and specificity are based in part on the concepts of “fairness and due process,” which “dictate that a court order must be sufficiently particular and definite so as to clearly identify the conduct that it prohibits”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).