State ex rel. Middlemas v. District Court
Montana Supreme Court
1Concurrence
MR. JUSTICE DAYIS:
(concurring).
I agree that Judge Padbury is disqualified to sit or act judicially in the habeas corpus proceeding brought by the petitioner Bishop. I agree also with the necessary conclusion which follows upon the opinion written by the Chief Justice, namely, that Judge Padbury’s disqualification is such that he was not an authorized judge within the meaning of R.C.M. 1947, see*88tion 94-101-4, who could issue the writ here, as he did, when Bishop’s petition was first presented to him, and that accordingly that writ as it went to the relator was void, and should now be annulled…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. HuettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1937
- State ex rel. Thompson v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1920
- Gaer v. Bank of BakerMontana Supreme Court · 1940
- State v. RobertsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1930
- State Ex Rel. King v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.