Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
IN RE HUNTINGTON, Petitioner, 1890 — 137 U.S. 63 · caselaw · US
General
IN RE HUNTINGTON, Petitioner
137 U.S. 6334 L. Ed. 567·Supreme Court of the United States·1890
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
IN RE HUNTINGTON, Petitioner.
ORIGINAL.
Not numbered.
Submitted October 27, 2890.
Decided November 3, 1890.
On the authority of Ex parte Mirzan, 119 U. S. 584, the court denies a petition for leave to file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
This was a petition for leave to file a petition for a writ ■ of habeas corptts. The petition sought to be filed set forth the issue of a writ of dedimus potestdtem by the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Colorado, to take the evidence of the petitioner, a resident of New York, to be used in a suit pending in that court; the execution of the writ by the commissioner named in it; the refusal of the witness to answer some of the questions propounded by the commissioner; an order of the court that he appear before the commissioner within thirty days and answer the unanswered questions, or otherwise be deemed in contempt, and stand committed till he should answer; his appearance and continued refusal to answer; and that the marshal of the Southern District of New York had taken him into custody for the contempt, and continued to hold him. The petitioner prayed for a writ of habeas corpus to that officer from this court.
Mr. Backus W. Huntington for the petitioner.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
Petitioner alleges that he is detained by the United States marshal for the Southern District of New York, by virtue of an order purporting to be an order of the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Colorado. The motion for leave to file a petition for the writ of habeas corpus is denied upon the authority of Ex parte Mirzan, 119 U. S. 584, and cases cited.
Denied.