Legal Opinion

Sedlacek v. Hann

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided December 19, 1952No. 33283PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBoslaugh, J.

The district court sustained the motion of appellee made before return day of the writ of habeas corpus to quash it on the ground that the petition for the writ did not state facts sufficient to justify its allowance. The writ was dissolved. This appeal is from that adjudication.

The sufficiency of the petition of the relator to support a writ of habeas corpus allowed by virtue thereof may be tested before making return thereto by a motion to quash. It is the right and duty of the court to set aside the writ, if the facts well pleaded therein when accepted as true are insufficient to entitle…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Dunn v. JonesNebraska Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Fancuilio v. FentonNebraska Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Swanson v. JonesNebraska Supreme Court · 1949
  4. McAvoy v. JonesNebraska Supreme Court · 1948
  5. Sedlacek v. GreenholtzNebraska Supreme Court · 1950

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. VannNebraska Supreme Court · 2020
  2. Case v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Mayfield v. HartmannNebraska Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Maria T. v. Jeremy S.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2018
  5. Almarez v. HartmannNebraska Supreme Court · 1982

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API