Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 141668 2008-08-20	IN MATTER OF CONTEMPT ORDERS CARPIO, J.
Second, if the answer to the contempt charge is satisfactory, the contempt proceedings end.[17] Even if we consider the 19 November 1999 Order sufficient to charge petitioners with indirect contempt, petitioners still could not be punished for contempt because Judge Cruz-Avisado found petitioners' explanation satisfactory. Only in cases of clear and contumacious refusal to obey should the power to punish for contempt be exercised.[18] Absent any finding that petitioners contumaciously refused to comply with the orders of the RTC, Judge Cruz-Avisado had no reason to punish petitioners for indirect contempt.
	GR NO. 176563 2007-04-02	IN MATTER OF APPLICATION FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IN BEHALF OF LETICIA LOURDES A. CAMARA v. ERNESTO P. PAGAYATAN CARPIO, J.
The facts of this case highlight respondent judge's failure to appreciate, in full measure, the nature of his power to cite litigants in contempt of court. It is a drastic and extraordinary attribute of courts, to be exercised in the interest of justice and only when there is clear and contumacious refusal to obey orders.[9] If a bona fide misunderstanding of the terms of an order does not justify the immediate institution of contempt proceedings,[10] with more reason that it should not serve as basis to prolong a litigant's detention under a prior contempt citation when, as here, there has been an attempt to comply with the order.