From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Huntington

U.S.
Nov 3, 1890
137 U.S. 63 (1890)

Opinion

ORIGINAL.

Not numbered.

Submitted October 27, 1890. Decided November 3, 1890.

On the authority of Ex parte Mirzan, 119 U.S. 584, the court denies a petition for leave to file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Mr. Backus W. Huntington for the petitioner.


THIS was a petition for leave to file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition sought to be filed set forth the issue of a writ of dedimus potestatem by the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Colorado, to take the evidence of the petitioner, a resident of New York, to be used in a suit pending in that court; the execution of the writ by the commissioner named in it; the refusal of the witness to answer some of the questions propounded by the commissioner; an order of the court that he appear before the commissioner within thirty days and answer the unanswered questions, or otherwise be deemed in contempt, and stand committed till he should answer; his appearance and continued refusal to answer; and that the marshal of the Southern District of New York had taken him into custody for the contempt, and continued to hold him. The petitioner prayed for a writ of habeas corpus to that officer from this court.


Petitioner alleges that he is detained by the United States marshal for the Southern District of New York, by virtue of an order purporting to be an order of the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Colorado. The motion for leave to file a petition for the writ of habeas corpus is denied upon the authority of Ex parte Mirzan, 119 U.S. 584, and cases cited.

Denied.


Summaries of

In re Huntington

U.S.
Nov 3, 1890
137 U.S. 63 (1890)
Case details for

In re Huntington

Case Details

Full title:IN RE HUNTINGTON, Petitioner

Court:U.S.

Date published: Nov 3, 1890

Citations

137 U.S. 63 (1890)

Citing Cases

State ex Rel. v. Cobb, County Judge

42 P. 123; State v. Sharp, 27 Minn. 39; Mayor, etc., v. Dragan, 45 Ala. 310; Minn v. Hitchcock, 185 U.S. 384;…

Riggins v. United States

While special reasons may exist why this should be the rule in respect of proceedings in state courts, which…