This appeal is from an order holding appellant-attorney in contempt for abandoning two clients’ criminal cases.
1. On the date set for appellant to show cause why he should not be held in contempt, he filed a motion to recuse the trial judge. The trial judge ruled the motion untimely and refused to consider it.
In
Hunnicutt v. Hunnicutt,
2. Appellant’s second enumeration is meritorious. The order holding appellant in contempt is insufficient because it does not set forth the findings of fact and conclusions of law required in such an order. See
Brown v. Hames,
Judgment reversed.
