People ex rel. Brown v. District Court of Yuma County

• Decision Date: 17 April 1899
• Citation: 26 Colo. 226,56 P. 1115
• Parties: PEOPLE ex rel. BROWN, Judge, v. DISTRICT COURT OF YUMA COUNTY et al.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

56 P. 1115

26 Colo. 226

PEOPLE ex rel. BROWN, Judge, v. DISTRICT COURT OF YUMA COUNTY et al.

Supreme Court of Colorado

April 17, 1899

Original application for writ of prohibition by the people, on the relation of Quitman Brown, judge, etc., against the district court of Yuma county, and E. E. Armour, judge thereof. Dismissed.

Quitman Brown, pro se.

Angus &amp Muntzing, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

This is an original application for a writ of prohibition to restrain respondents from further proceeding with certain writs of prohibition and certiorari issued out of the district court of Yuma county against the relator, as county judge of said county. From the return to the rule to show cause, it appears that upon application of certain parties, who had theretofore obtained judgments in the county court of Yuma county, the respondent issued the writs in question to restrain the relator, as county judge and ex officio clerk of the county court of Yuma county, from setting aside said judgments, and ordering him to certify the proceedings pending before him to the district court, and, upon his refusal to obey said writs cited him to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt. While the matters were thus pending, this proceeding was instituted by relator. The judgments in question were obtained in the county court before Hon. L. C. Warren, who was then judge, against certain parties, for whom the relator appeared and acted as attorney. After two years or more had elapsed since the judgments were obtained, the relator, Brown, was elected judge of the county court, and qualified and assumed the duties of said office about January 15, 1896. Within a few days thereafter, motions were filed in the county court to set aside the judgments and to vacate whatever proceedings had been had thereunder. These motions were set for hearing on the second day of March, that being the first day of the next succeeding term of the county court. The judgment creditors on February 25th appeared by attorney, and by motion requested relator to transfer and certify said causes, with the original papers to the district court, as provided in section 438 of the Civil Code, upon the ground that the relator was disqualified from passing upon or determining said motions, because of his having acted as attorney in said causes for the opposing parties. On February 25th the applications to transfer the causes to the district court were overruled, and thereupon the judgment creditors sued out the writs in question. In his reply to the answer of respondent, relator admits that he denied the applications to transfer the...