In re Wood

CourtSupreme Court of Michigan
Writing for the CourtCHAMPLIN
Citation45 N.W. 1113,82 Mich. 75
Decision Date02 July 1890
PartiesIn re WOOD.

82 Mich. 75
45 N.W. 1113

In re WOOD.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

July 2, 1890.


On application for writ of habeas corpus.

[45 N.W. 1113]

E. T. Wood, in pro. per., John G. Hawley, Edwin F. Conely, and W. H. H. Russell,

[45 N.W. 1114]

for petitioner. Jasper C. Gates, for Wayne Circuit Court, respondent.


CHAMPLIN, C. J.

Wood presented his petition to this court, setting up that he was imprisoned and restrained of his liberty by Harvey S. Millard, deputy-sheriff of the county of Wayne, at the city of Lansing, by virtue of a writ of process issued out of the circuit court for the county of Wayne, a copy of which is as follows:

“State of Michigan, county of Wayne-ss.: In the circuit court for said county. To the Sheriff or Deputy-Sheriff of Wayne County, greeting: Whereas, it has been made to appear to said circuit court, by return of the officers duly made, that E. T. Wood was duly served with an order of said court citing him to appear before said court on Wednesday, the 4th day of June, 1890, at 9:30 o'clock A. M., to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt of court, and the hearing of said matter being continued until 2 P. M. of said June 4th, at which time said respondent was ordered to appear in court, and E. T. Wood has made default in obeying the command of said order: Now, therefore, you, and each of you, are hereby commanded, in the name of the people of the state of Michigan, forth with to apprehend said Wood, and bring him before the said court to be dealt with according to law; and you are further commanded to detain, in the manner prescribed by law, the said Wood, until he shall be discharged by said circuit court, and of this writ make due return. Witness the Honorable H. N. BREVOORT, Presiding Judge, on the 4th day of June, A. D. 1890. WM. P. LANE, Clerk of the Circuit Court for the County of Wayne. By WM. MAY, Dp. Clk.”

The petitioner alleges that he is not imprisoned or detained by virtue of any process, judgment, decree, or execution specified in the eighth section of chapter 296, How. St. He alleges several causes why his imprisonment is illegal, viz.: Because it does not appear in or by said writ or process that he was lawfully required to appear in person in the circuit court for the county of Wayne on the 4th day of June, A. D. 1890; (2) because it does not appear in or by said writ or process that he had been guilty of any contempt of court, or that for any other reason the circuit court for the county of Wayne had any authority, power, or jurisdiction to make an order requiring him to appear before the court on the 4th of June, 1890, to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt of court; (3) because such writ is void on its face, and without warrant of law. The petition sets up further and other facts and proceedings which led up to the issuing of the writ, which will be referred to below so far as is necessary to an understanding of the case. We issued our writ of habeas corpus, and the officer made return that he had Mr. Wood in custody under the above-named writ. The return of the officer was traversed, setting up that the proceedings upon which the writ issued were without authority of law, and void. We thereupon adjourned the hearing, and ordered a writ of certiorari to issue to the circuit court for the county of Wayne; and return has been made to this writ which shows that, on the 29th of May last, said Emery T. Wood was adjudicated guilty of contempt of court, and the following order was entered upon the journal of said court: “At a session of the circuit court for the county of Wayne convened and held at the circuit court room, in the city of Detroit, on the twenty-ninth day of May, in the year one thousand eight hundred and ninety. In the matter of Emery T. Wood, for contempt of court. Present: Hons. H. N. BREVOORT, GEO. GARTNER, GEO. S. HOSMER, C. J. REILLY, Circuit Judges. Before Judge BREVOORT. It appearing to the court now here, from its own immediate view thereof, that Emery T. Wood hath been and is guilty of disorderly behavior in using language disrepectful to the court during its sitting, and in the immediate view and presence of the said court, and directly tending to interrupt its proceedings, that is to say, in using the following language: ‘With all due respect to your honor, I must say that when your honor chastises me from the bench, as your honor does now, and when you chastise me as you did when the pleadings came up, and when the public press sends out a report, and sets your honor upon the pedestal, and says I do not know how to draw a declaration, your honor has overstepped the mark, and not accorded me the justice I am entitled to in this court. It seems to me, while I cannot refrain from the feeling which takes possession of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 practice notes
  • Robertson v. State, 6 Div. 643
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • December 16, 1924
    ...conferred jurisdiction upon the court. Without the affidavits the proceeding would have been quashed. In re E.T. Wood, 82 Mich. 82, 45 N.W. 1113. Allegations in the petition supported by the affidavits will be ignored. When one charges another with the serious crime of interfering with the ......
  • Creekmore v. United States, 4591.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • October 17, 1916
    ...cases cited in Cyc. and Ruling Case Law to sustain the converse of the last proposition considered. The first case cited is In re Wood, 82 Mich. 75, 45 N.W. 1113. This case does not at all sustain the text. It did not involve a question as to the effect of an affidavit upon information and ......
  • Charles Cushman Co. v. Mackesy
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • June 30, 1938
    ...parte Duncan, supra, the court holds that unless a petition for contempt is sworn to, the court has no jurisdiction. In re Emery T. Wood, 82 Mich. 75, 45 N.W. 1113, was a case of a habeas corpus petition to secure the release of one who had been committed for contempt. There was no affidavi......
  • People v. Henry, Docket No. 8329
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • June 26, 1970
    ...irregularities in initiating the proceedings. 'If the respondents had refused to appear in court, as was the case in (In) Re Wood (1890), 82 Mich. 75, 45 N.W. 1113, or if they had been arrested upon the capias and had denied the jurisdiction of the court for the reason that no affidavit or ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
12 cases
  • Robertson v. State, 6 Div. 643
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • December 16, 1924
    ...conferred jurisdiction upon the court. Without the affidavits the proceeding would have been quashed. In re E.T. Wood, 82 Mich. 82, 45 N.W. 1113. Allegations in the petition supported by the affidavits will be ignored. When one charges another with the serious crime of interfering with the ......
  • Creekmore v. United States, 4591.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • October 17, 1916
    ...cases cited in Cyc. and Ruling Case Law to sustain the converse of the last proposition considered. The first case cited is In re Wood, 82 Mich. 75, 45 N.W. 1113. This case does not at all sustain the text. It did not involve a question as to the effect of an affidavit upon information and ......
  • Charles Cushman Co. v. Mackesy
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • June 30, 1938
    ...parte Duncan, supra, the court holds that unless a petition for contempt is sworn to, the court has no jurisdiction. In re Emery T. Wood, 82 Mich. 75, 45 N.W. 1113, was a case of a habeas corpus petition to secure the release of one who had been committed for contempt. There was no affidavi......
  • People v. Henry, Docket No. 8329
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • June 26, 1970
    ...irregularities in initiating the proceedings. 'If the respondents had refused to appear in court, as was the case in (In) Re Wood (1890), 82 Mich. 75, 45 N.W. 1113, or if they had been arrested upon the capias and had denied the jurisdiction of the court for the reason that no affidavit or ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT