People v. Tomashevsky

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that principles of direct criminal contempt did not apply where a judge heard laughter in a crowded courtroom but did not personally know whether the two contemnors laughed
• “ ‘the law imposes *** [that] the order *** contain facts sufficient to show that the court was warranted in entering the order’ ”
• \ 'the law imposes *** [that] the order *** contain facts sufficient to show that the court was warranted in entering the order' \
• \`the law imposes * * * [that] the order * * * contain facts sufficient to show that the court was warranted in entering the order'\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).