Ex parte Clancy
California Supreme Court
Application to the Supreme Court for a discharge from imprisonment upon a writ of habeas corpus. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSharpstein, J.
— The petitioner alleges that he is imprisoned by the sheriff of San Francisco, and that such imprisonment is illegal, for the following reasons: —
On the second day of July, 1891, petitioner, upon the petition of certain of his creditors, was adjudged by the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco an insolvent debtor, and ordered to file, and did file, his schedules in said matter of insolvency. On the sixteenth day of July, 1891, petitioner, in compliance with *554an order of said court, appeared therein, and was examined concerning his property and estate, and thereupon said…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Selowsky v. Superior Court of Napa CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Queirolo v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.California Court of Appeal · 1931
- In re the Estate of WittmeierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Carter v. WasteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- Bogardus v. O'DeaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.