
    REVIEW IN CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS.
    Court of Appeals for Hamilton County.
    Harry H. Ragsdale v. Jennie W. Ragsdale.
    Decided, November, 1917.
    
      Contempt — Review Provided where the Finding is “Guilty,” and also where “Not Guilty” — Such a Case not Appealable — Custody of Children — Orders Pertaining to may be Made in a Court of Equity.
    
    Direct statutory provision for review of contempt proceedings where the party has been found guilty affords ground by analogy for prosecution of error in cases where there has been a refusal tó punish for contempt..
    
      Hunt, Bennett & Utter for plaintiff.
    
      W. A. Rinchhoff contra.
   Hamilton, J.

A party found guilty of contempt may have his ease reviewed on error under Section 12146, General Code; and while no direct provision in the statute is made to review a refusal, to punish for contempt by error proceedings, by analogy it would seem that this remedy may be invoked upon such refusal. But contempt proceedings being quasi-criminal in their nature, can not be considered chancery cases, and such proceedings are not therefore appealable, but may be reviewed on error only.

Questions of custody of children are cognizable in a court of equity, and, when properly before such court, the court will make necessary orders for the support of such children; but no such question is before the court in the instant case.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is sustained.

Jones, P. J., and Gorman, J., concur;  