Rule of Gompers

“[A] civil contemnor is always purged of the civil contempt and coercive force when he or she complies with the court’s order.” Korman v. Strick, 133 Ariz. 471, 474 (1982). In other words, when someone is put in jail for disobeying a court’s order, that person holds the key to the jail door–comply and they’ll be released; don’t comply and they’ll remain. This idea was most famously promulgated the U.S. Supreme Court case of Gompers v. Buck Stove & Range Co., 221 U.S. 418, 442 (1911); hence, the name Rule in Gompers. In Korman, the husband was ordered to pay $500 of the wife’s attorney’s fees. He refused, and the Court told him to report to jail. Husband paid the $500 that same day. The Court insisted he still report to jail. The Arizona Supreme Court reversed the order, finding because he had complied, he could not be imprisoned. This rule applies to “indirect civil contempts,” i.e., violations of a court’s order outside of court. Other forms of contempt may require imprisonment in similar situations.