Orr v. Jackson,

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtEVANS
PartiesORR v. JACKSON, JUDGE.
Decision Date17 December 1910

149 Iowa 641
128 N.W. 958

ORR
v.
JACKSON, JUDGE.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Dec. 17, 1910.


Proceedings in certiorari to test the legality of an order in habeas corpus proceeding whereby the defendant judge admitted the petitioner therein to bail, pending his appeal to the Supreme Court from an order of dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Reversed.

[128 N.W. 959]

Betty & Betty, for plaintiff.

J. G. Kammerer and E. F. Richman, for defendant.


EVANS, J.

This case is one of a series of successive proceedings each of which involved the same and only question. In June 1909, one Otto Seidlitz upon information of the plaintiff herein, E. L. Orr, was adjudged by the defendant judge to be guilty of contempt for violating a liquor injunction, and was adjudged to pay a fine and to be imprisoned for three months. Seidlitz sued out a writ of certiorari in the nature of appeal to this court and obtained here a review of such order. The result of such review here was that the certiorari proceedings were dismissed and the judgment of the lower court affirmed. Seidlitz v. Jackson, Judge, 125 N. W. 230. On June 20, 1910, a procedendo issued from this court, and Seidlitz was taken into custody by the sheriff of Muscatine county, in execution of the judgment against him. On the same day he sued out a writ of habeas corpus before the same judge, challenging again the legality of his imprisonment. In accordance with statutory procedure in such cases, he was immediately brought before the judge by the sheriff in whose custody he was, and a hearing was had on his petition. On such hearing, the defendant judge dismissed the habeas corpus proceeding and remanded back the petitioner, Seidlitz, to the custody of the sheriff who was named as defendant in such proceeding. At the same time, however, the defendant judge ordered that the petitioner be admitted to bail pending his appeal to the Supreme Court from the order of dismissal of his habeas corpus petition. Bail being given forthwith, the petitioner was released from custody. The plaintiff herein challenges the legality of that part of the order of the defendant judge wherein Seidlitz was admitted to bail pending appeal to this court.

1. It is urged by the defendant that the plaintiff is not a party in interest, and has no standing in this court, and that this proceeding should therefore be dismissed. In Hemmer v. Bonson, 139 Iowa, 210, 117 N. W. 257, 19 L. R. A. (N. S.) 610, we held adversely to this contention. It is also urged that certiorari will not lie because there is a speedy and adequate remedy by appeal. This position is not tenable. The plaintiff herein was not a party to the habeas corpus proceeding in such a sense that he could appeal. Neither could he compel the defendant sheriff to appeal. It is made to appear, also, that on November 7, 1910,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 practice notes
  • Manning v. Engelkes, No. 62521
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 27, 1979
    ...(city allowed certiorari to challenge adverse ruling sustaining defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of speedy trial); Orr v. Jackson, 149 Iowa 641, 128 N.W. 958 (1910) (complaining witness allowed certiorari to challenge convicted defendant's release on bail pending appeal of dismissal o......
  • Atwood v. Vilsack, No. 05-0485.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 29, 2006
    ...because the clause only has "reference to persons charged with offenses against the laws of the State of Iowa"); Orr v. Jackson, 149 Iowa 641, 643-44, 128 N.W. 958, 960 (1910) (holding that the bail guarantee clause is not applicable in a habeas corpus proceeding because such proc......
  • People ex rel. Curtis v. Kidney
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • January 14, 1919
    ...v. Nast, 209 Mo. 708, 731, 108 S. W. 563;State ex rel. Beekley v. McDonald, 123 Minn. 84, 142 N. W. 1051;Orr v. Jackson, 149 Iowa, 641, 128 N. W. 958;State ex rel. Brandegee v. Clements, 52 Mont. 57, 155 Pac. 271. A few of the states declare the doctrine that the cause of the restraint dete......
  • Allen v. Wild, No. 49351
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 17, 1957
    ...custody upon his furnishing a supersedeas bond. We hold the court was not so empowered. This question was considered in Orr v. Jackson, 149 Iowa 641, 128 N.W. 958, 960, in which, after the supreme court had held valid the conviction of one Seidlitz for contempt and he had been taken into cu......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
11 cases
  • Manning v. Engelkes, No. 62521
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 27, 1979
    ...(city allowed certiorari to challenge adverse ruling sustaining defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of speedy trial); Orr v. Jackson, 149 Iowa 641, 128 N.W. 958 (1910) (complaining witness allowed certiorari to challenge convicted defendant's release on bail pending appeal of dismissal o......
  • Atwood v. Vilsack, No. 05-0485.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 29, 2006
    ...because the clause only has "reference to persons charged with offenses against the laws of the State of Iowa"); Orr v. Jackson, 149 Iowa 641, 643-44, 128 N.W. 958, 960 (1910) (holding that the bail guarantee clause is not applicable in a habeas corpus proceeding because such proc......
  • People ex rel. Curtis v. Kidney
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • January 14, 1919
    ...v. Nast, 209 Mo. 708, 731, 108 S. W. 563;State ex rel. Beekley v. McDonald, 123 Minn. 84, 142 N. W. 1051;Orr v. Jackson, 149 Iowa, 641, 128 N. W. 958;State ex rel. Brandegee v. Clements, 52 Mont. 57, 155 Pac. 271. A few of the states declare the doctrine that the cause of the restraint dete......
  • Allen v. Wild, No. 49351
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 17, 1957
    ...custody upon his furnishing a supersedeas bond. We hold the court was not so empowered. This question was considered in Orr v. Jackson, 149 Iowa 641, 128 N.W. 958, 960, in which, after the supreme court had held valid the conviction of one Seidlitz for contempt and he had been taken into cu......
  • 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