Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

62 Colo. 101

In re Nash

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided September 15, 1916

Supreme Court of Colorado · decided 1916-09-15

<p>1. Ne Exeat — Scope of the Writ, has not been enlarged by the code. (101.)</p> <p>Petitioner being defendant in an action for slander was arrested and detained under a writ of Ne Exeat. He was discharged upon his petition under the habeas corpus act'. (101.)</p> <p>2. Supreme Court — Jurisdiction. Petitioner being unlawfully detained under process from the District Court, this court entertained his .petition under the habeas corpus act, and ordered his discharge. (101.)</p>

Relies on People ex rel. Porteus v. Barton

Decided 1916-09-15

Mr. Justice White

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2The sole question involved herein is whether petitioner may be legally held in custody by the sheriff of Moffat County under and by virtue of a writ of Ne Exeat República, issued out of the District Court for that county, in an action at law there pending, to recover of petitioner herein damages for slander.

¶3The scope of the writ of Ne Exeat has not, in this state, been enlarged by statute, — sec. 469, Code of Civil Procedure, — and if there are exceptions, as claimed, to the rule that the writ is a mesne process of equity, the underlying facts in the action for slander were insufficient to authorize the issuance of the writ. — People, ex rel v. Barton, 16 Colo. 75, 80, 26 Pac. 149, 29 Cyc. 384, 386, 387.

¶4The petitioner is, therefore, entitled to rely upon the habeas corpus act and is accordingly discharged from custody.

¶5Decision en banc.

/62/colo/101 · .json · Public domain