Clarke v. McDade
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE SÜPERIOR COUET OE THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FEANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. The case is stated in the opinion. submitted on his brief, on which were Miss Glara S. Foltz and the plaintiff in error.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Peckham
The records in the above numbers, 158 and 159, relate to proceedings in habeas corpus. Those records are printed. Numbers 161 and 165 also relate to proceedings in habeas corpus. The records in those cases are not printed. Number 160 relates to a writ of error in what is termed in the record “a»-action.”
All the records now before us, both printed and unprinted, are such a mass of confusion as to render it difficult to determine what has been done in the court below. The records relating to the proceedings taken upon habeas corpus show applications for that writ to' various judges of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hamblin v. Western Land Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
3Cited by14 opinions
- Marvin v. TroutSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co. v. KirvenSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Hiawassee River Power Co. v. Carolina-Tennessee Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Harding v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. McDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.