Buckingham v. Barnum
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Habeas Corpus. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion. Return held sufficient on demurrer, by Park, J., and prisoner remanded ; motion in error by the prisoner.
1Opinion of the CourtHinman, C. J.
This was a habeas corpus, the object of which was to try the legality of the imprisonment of the applicant, Henry Buckingham, for not appearing before Joseph Thompson Esq., a justice of the peace, to give his deposition, to be used before the superior court for Fairfield county, at its October session in 1861, in a case there pending between said Buckingham as plaintiff, and one Gager as defendant. No question is made as to the regularity of the summons served upon him to give his deposition, nor as to the fact that his *359place of residence, which was the place where he was summoned to appear…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Banks v. Connecticut Railway & Lighting Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1906
- The People v. KrotzIllinois Supreme Court · 1930
- Ex parte Welborn v. FaulconerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
- Murray v. SenatroConnecticut Superior Court · 1958
- Holland v. KrawskiConnecticut Superior Court · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.