In re Hirsch

Second Circuit

In re Hirsch

87 F. 1005, 31 C.C.A. 350, 1898 U.S. App. LEXIS 2055

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided March 2, 1898·No. No. 68·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We concur in the opinion of the circuit judge dismissing the writ of habeas corpus, and therefore affirm the order appealed from. We do not, however, intend to decide that the writ of habeas corpus is the proper remedy to secure a review' of the judgment of the state court in punishing a wtitness for disobedience of its process of subpoena ad testificandum. See Ex parte Parks, 93 U. S. 18; In re Wood, 140 U. S. 278, 11 Sup. Ct. 738; In re Frederich, 149 U. S. 70, 13 Sup. Ct. 793; In re Tyler, 149 U. S. 180, 13 Sup. Ct. 785; Ex parte Crouch, 112 U. S. 178, 5 Sup. Ct. 96.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We concur in the opinion of the circuit judge dismissing the writ of habeas corpus, and therefore affirm the order appealed from. We do not, however, intend to decide that the writ of habeas corpus is the proper remedy to secure a review' of the judgment of the state court in punishing a wtitness for disobedience of its process of subpoena ad testificandum. See Ex parte Parks, 93 U. S. 18; In re Wood, 140 U. S. 278, 11 Sup. Ct. 738; In re Frederich, 149 U. S. 70, 13 Sup. Ct. 793; In re Tyler, 149 U. S. 180, 13 Sup. Ct. 785; Ex parte Crouch, 112 U. S. 178, 5 Sup. Ct. 96.

In re Hirsch, 87 F. 1005, 31 C.C.A. 350, 1898 U.S. App. LEXIS 2055 (2d Cir. 1898).

Pincite

87 F. 1005 (In re Hirsch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related