Hier v. Hutchings
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error from the district court of Box Butte county. Tried below before Kinicaid, J. Defendant in error, without express authority of statute, cannot maintain in his own name an action for the penalty prescribed by section 361 of the Criminal Code, forbidding the rearrest of a prisoner who had been discharged oh habeas corpus. (Colburn v. Swett, 42 Mass. 232; Omaha é R. V. R. Co. v. Hale, 45 Neb. 418; Si.
Read the full summary
Error from the district court of Box Butte county. Tried below before Kinicaid, J. Defendant in error, without express authority of statute, cannot maintain in his own name an action for the penalty prescribed by section 361 of the Criminal Code, forbidding the rearrest of a prisoner who had been discharged oh habeas corpus. (Colburn v. Swett, 42 Mass. 232; Omaha é R. V. R. Co. v. Hale, 45 Neb. 418; Si. Louis, A. & T. R. Co. v. State, 19 S. W. Rep. [Ark.] 572; Fleming v. Bailey, 5 East [Eng.] 313; Barnard v. Gostling, 2 East .[Eng.] 569.) •
1Opinion of the Court
Ryan, C.
In this action there was a recovery in the district court of Box Butte county of the sum of $500 under the provisions of section 361 of the Criminal Code. The jury found specially that constable 1-Iier received notice, before taking Hutchings into his custody, that Hutchings had already been released on habeas corpus from the custody of an officer by whom he had been arrested upon a mittimus in the same case as that in which was issued the mittimus by virtue of which constable Hier arrested him and carried him to the county seat, a distance of about fifteen miles, and that said…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bank of Commerce v. GoosNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Clother v. MaherNebraska Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by6 opinions
- Cram v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1909
- Sunderland Bros. v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1920
- Abel v. ConoverNebraska Supreme Court · 1960
- Abel v. ConoverNebraska Supreme Court · 1960
- Sunderland Bros. v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1920
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.