Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lincoln-Lucky & Lee Mining Co. v. District Court

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided September 3, 1894No. 561; No. 558Published

Petition for writs of prohibition, one by the Lincoln-Lucky & Lee Mining Company to the district court, sitting in the First Judicial District, for the trial of causes arising under the laws of the United States; and the other by W. P. Cunningham to the county commissioners of Santa Fe County. Preliminary writs made absolute in each cause; Freeman, J., dissenting. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1DissentFreeman, J.

(dissenting). — The conclusion reached by the majority of the court in this case is that one of the judges of the supreme court of this territory may, at chambers, upon ex parte application of a party to a litigation, issue his fiat to another judge presiding in open court, in the trial of a cause, commanding such judge forthwith to adjourn the hearing of said cause. It follows as a corollary that the refusal of the judge thus commanded to obey the mandate of his brother judge would subject him to the pains and penalties of fine and imprisonment as for contempt. The effect of this proposition…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. American Insurance v. 356 Bales of CottonSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
  2. Capron v. Van NoordenSupreme Court of the United States · 1804
  3. Smith v. WhitneySupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  4. Clinton v. EnglebrechtSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  5. The People Ex Rel. the Mayor v. . NicholsNew York Court of Appeals · 1880

15 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