Farmers & Mechanics Nat’l Bank v. Wilkinson, 266 U.S. 503 (1925)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 266 U.S. 497, click here.

Farmers & Mechanics National Bank

of Fort Worth, Texas v. Wilkinson
No. 487

Motion to dismiss submitted October 6, 1924
Decided January 5, 1925
266 U.S. 503

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Syllabus

1. When a decree of the district court has been affirmed by a decree of the circuit court of appeals which this Court has declined to review by certiorari, questions concerning its validity and merits cannot be reopened either by the district court or through an attempted review in this Court, by direct appeal or writ of error, of the order enforcing the mandate. P. 506.

2. An order of the district court inflicting punishment for contempt is not ordinarily reviewable in this Court by direct appeal or writ of error. Id.

3. Of writ of error and appeal, the former is the appropriate mode of review in criminal contempts, but c. 448, § 4, 39 Stat. 727, renders the distinction unimportant. P. 507.

4. An order of the district court punishing a party for contempt in disobeying an order made to enforce a mandate from the circuit court of appeal cannot be reviewed here by direct writ of error upon the ground that it exceeded the district court’s jurisdiction and infringed constitutional rights where these questions were foreclosed by the decree of the circuit court of appeals upon which the mandate issued. Id.

Appeal dismissed.

[sic] from an order of the district court commanding the appellant to make a payment, as ordered by a referee in bankruptcy, and fining the appellant for contumacy in having refused to do so. The referee’s order was made in pursuance of a mandate from the circuit court of appeals. See 295 F. 120.