gno.law

Ex parte McDonald

California Supreme Court · No. 20,405 · 1888-03-26 · Published · 2 Cal. Unrep. 853 · 17 P. 234 · 1888 Cal. LEXIS 961

Ex Parte McDONALD

Area
other

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

Per CURIAM.

The petitioner, being restrained of her liberty, sues out a writ of habeas corpus, praying to be discharged upon the ground that the judgment under which the proceedings were had which resulted in her imprisonment for contempt had been discharged by subsequent proceedings under the insolvent laws of this state. The superior court had jurisdiction to hear and determine this question, and, it would appear, did determine it adversely to the petitioner. If wrong in so doing, it is but error, and petitioner’s remedy, if any, is by appeal. The application is denied, and petitioner remanded to the custody of the sheriff of the city and county of San Francisco.