Legal Opinion

In re of Morton

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1862PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Habeas Corpus. The petition set forth, that on April 26th, .1862, the following complaint was made, and filed with W. W. Mitchell, a Justice of the Peace of Ionia county: ‘■'■State of Michigan, County of Ionia, ss.: Alexander F. Bell, being duly sworn, says, that he is a resident of the township of Ionia, in said county, and that he verily believes that Giles B. Conkey did, at the township of Ionia aforesaid, between the fifteenth day of April, 1862, and the twenty-sixth day…

Read the full summary

Habeas Corpus. The petition set forth, that on April 26th, .1862, the following complaint was made, and filed with W. W. Mitchell, a Justice of the Peace of Ionia county: ‘■'■State of Michigan, County of Ionia, ss.: Alexander F. Bell, being duly sworn, says, that he is a resident of the township of Ionia, in said county, and that he verily believes that Giles B. Conkey did, at the township of Ionia aforesaid, between the fifteenth day of April, 1862, and the twenty-sixth day of April, 1862, sell intoxicating liquors, in violation of an act entitled “An Act to prevent the Manufacture and Sale…

1Opinion of the Court

The Court

held the complaint not sufficient' to confer jurisdiction. The statute (§ 1667) provides that, whenever a complainant is required to state facts and circumstances for the information of the court or magistrate to whom the complaint is made, and the complainant shall be unable, of his own knowledge, to state sufficient facts and circumstances to authorize the issuing of a warrant, the court or magistrate may, after the making of such complaint, issue subpmnas for the attendance of witnesses to testify concerning such facts and circumstances. This language *210does not authorize the making…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Ex parte HolmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1869
  2. Ex parte PerkinsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana · 1887
  3. In Re HarrandMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
  4. In re CaryDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1882
  5. In re MeadMichigan Supreme Court · 1922

1 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