Maloney v. Sacks, Warden

Ohio Court of Appeals

Maloney v. Sacks, Warden

176 N.E.2d 326, 112 Ohio App. 440, 16 Ohio Op. 2d 335, 1961 Ohio App. LEXIS 718

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 14, 1961

Docket6656

StatusPublished

This text of 176 N.E.2d 326 (Maloney v. Sacks, Warden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Maloney v. Sacks, Warden, 176 N.E.2d 326, 112 Ohio App. 440, 16 Ohio Op. 2d 335, 1961 Ohio App. LEXIS 718 (Ohio Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

*441 Per Curiam.

The sole question before the court arises on a motion to dismiss, filed by counsel for the respondent who alleges that the habeas corpus case pending in this court should be dismissed because of the pendency of another habeas corpus case in the United States District Court between the same parties.

The petitioner admits the pendency of such other case, and that it is in habeas corpus, between the same parties, but alleges that the questions raised are not in all respects identical. It is clear that the legality of petitioner’s imprisonment is the issue in both cases.

The motion is well taken, and the case will be, and hereby is, dismissed.

Case dismissed.

Duffey, P. J., Bryant and Duffy, JJ., concur.

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