Pryor v. Waddill

380 S.W.2d 263, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 306
Court of Appeals of Kentucky·Decided June 26, 1964·Published

Opinion

MILLIKEN, Chief Justice.

The petitioner requests mandamus for copies of warrants, transcript of the evidence, closing arguments, instructions to the jury, judgment of his conviction and copies of three indictments, claiming that he “needs the records to support his allegations in pending litigation” without specifying what the litigation is. The respondent asserts that he has not been asked to supply any such records to the petitioner, that he has not refused to do so, and petitioner has not shown himself entitled to the extraordinary relief he now seeks.

The petition is too vague to justify the granting of the relief sought, Oakes v. Gentry, Judge, Ky., 380 S.W.2d 237, decided June 19, 1964, and the mandamus is therefore denied.

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

Pryor v. Waddill, 380 S.W.2d 263, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 306 (Ky. Ct. App. 1964).

380 S.W.2d 263 (Pryor v. Waddill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Oakes v. Gentry
380 S.W.2d 237 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1964)