Legal Opinion

Seward v. Heinze

District Court, N.D. California

Decided September 4, 1958No. Civ. No. 7792PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DONOVAN, District Judge (Sitting by Assignment).

This matter comes before the Court on application by petitioner for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner claims he “is now illegally and unlawfully restrained and deprived of his lawful rights, by "* * * [respondent], contrary to and in violation of privileges and immunities, equal protection of law and -due process of law clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and in violation of similar provisions of Article 1, Section 13, of the [West’s Ann.] California Constitution * *

The facts recited by petitioner…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. McNally v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. United States Ex Rel. Darcy v. HandySupreme Court of the United States · 1956
  3. Higgins v. SteeleCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1952
  4. Sampsell v. People of State of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1951
  5. Woollomes v. Heinze, Warden of California State Prison at FolsomCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1952

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Edward Charles Curtis v. John E. Bennett, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1965
  2. In re NiewinskiDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API