Legal Opinion

Ex parte Cottrell

California Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1881No. 10,715PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Application for discharge upon writ of habeas corpus.

1Opinion of the Court

The Court:

Some of the questions discussed in this case were considered in Ex parte Cottrell, reported supra. The contempt proceeding in this case is based upon an alleged disobedience of *421the same order that the petitioner was committed for disobeying in that case. In the earlier case the petitioner was cited to appear by an order to show cause, and in the later he was brought before the Court by an attachment. The Code authorizes either mode. (C. C. P., § 1212.)

In the case now before us it is alleged in the petition, and not denied in the return, that the order which the petitioner is charged…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ex parte PerkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
  2. Ex parte CohenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
  3. People v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1850
  4. People v. McLaneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. In Re LindleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Golden Gate Consolidated Hydraulic Mining Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
  3. Ex parte SternesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Ex parte StephenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  5. In Re McCoyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909

11 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