Legal Opinion
In Re Abrams
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 28, 1980No. Civ. 22591PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
COLOGNE, Acting P. J.
The trial court convicted petitioner Edward H. Abrams of criminal contempt of court for disobedience of a subpoe na duces tecum directing him to appear as a witness at the trial of a civil action. The subpoena was served on petitioner’s retained attorney rather than on petitioner. Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus to vacate his conviction on the ground the court lacked personal jurisdiction over him.
Habeas corpus is a proper procedure to. challenge the adjudication. (E.g., In re Buckley (1973) 10 Cal.3d 237, 240, fn. 1 [110 Cal.Rptr. 121, 514 P.2d 1201, 68…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Rose v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- In Re BuckleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Foley v. FoleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Golden Gate Consolidated Hydraulic Mining Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Warner v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Honda Motor Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Ruttenberg v. RuttenbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- House v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- Venture v. G. C. Wallace Consulting Engineers, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1990
- Sullivan v. State Board of ControlCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.