Page:North Dakota Reports (vol. 2).pdf/487

 Corliss, C. J., in concurring, does not wish to be regarded as approving or disapproving the decision in Grand Forks Nat. Bank v. Minneapolis & N. Elevator Co., 6 Dak. 357.

State or North Dakota, ex rel. Alanson W. Edwards, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Alfred C. Davis, Defendant and Appellant.

Order Punishing For Contempt—Right of Appeal.

An order punishing a person for contempt in disobeying an injunction, where the contempt proceeding is not and cannot be used as a remedy to enforce obedience to the injunction or to indemnify the party injured by the contempt, is not an order made in an action or special proceeding, and is therefore not appealable. Such a contempt proceeding is not remedial in its character, but purely of a criminal nature, its object being exclusively to vindicate the authority of the court.

(Opinion Filed March 19, 1892.)

APPAEL from district court, Cass county; Hon. Roderick Rose, Judge presiding.

Alfred C. Davis and Benton & Amidon, for appellant. S. G. Roberts, for respondent.

Proceedings on the relation of Alanson W. Edwards against Alfred C. Davis, for contempt of court. From an order adjudg- ing defendant guilty, he appeals. Appeal dismissed.

Benton & Amidon, for appellant:

The judgment is appealable. Brinkley v. Brinkley, 47 N. Y. 40; Railroad Co. v. Railroad Co.,71 N. Y. 430; Carrington v. Railroad Co., 52 N. Y. 583. The judge presiding had no authority or jurisdiction to hear the proceeding, or render judgment. Wells on Jurisdiction, § 174; Klaise v. State, 27 Wis 462; Wallace v. Railroad Co., 25 Pac. Rep. 278; Gale v. Michie. 47 Mo. 326; State v. Shea, 95 Mo. 85; People v. O’Neil, 47 Cal, 109. The alleged restraining order was void because not issued. in a case provided by the statute for the allowance of an injunc-