False Imprisonment. Judge Held Liable for Ordering Plaintiff's Rearrest after Habeas Corpus Had Been Perfected

1952 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 803
Keyword(s):  
Habeas Corpus ◽  
False Imprisonment

The crumbling citadel: absolute judicial immunity de-rationalised

Legal Studies ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abimbola A. Olowofoyeku
Keyword(s):  
Habeas Corpus ◽  
Home Office ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
False Imprisonment

A Turk is fined and recommended for deportation by a magistrate for breach of the Aliens Order 1953. The magistrate recommends that he not be detained in custody pending the Home Office’ decision on the recommendation for deportation. The Turk appeals to the Crown Court against the recommendation for his deportation. The judge rules that he has no jurisidiction to hear the appeal and dismisses it. On seeing the erstwhile appellant about to leave the court premises the judge cries ‘stop him’, on which the appellant Turk is arrested by the police and detained in custody. The Divisional Court of the Queens Bench issues an order of habeas corpus for the release of the Turk on the ground that the judge in the Crown Court had been functus officio before be began to consider whether the Turk should be detained or not. The Turk consequently brings an action against the Crown Court judge and the police, claiming damages for assault and false imprisonment. It is decided that the judge is immune from liability because he had acted in his capacity as a judge.

Captain Hodsdon’s Legal Entanglements

2018 ◽  
pp. 30-39
Author(s):  
Eric M. Freedman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United States Army ◽  
New Hampshire ◽  
The United States ◽  
Habeas Corpus ◽  
Prisoner Of War ◽  
Early National Period ◽  
Early National ◽  
The Subject ◽  
False Imprisonment

Illustrating the numerous legal restraints on power in the early national period, this chapter focuses on Captain Isaac Hodsdon of the United States Army, accused of wrongfully imprisoning men in Stewartstown, New Hampshire during the War of 1812. They first obtained a state writ of habeas corpus. Hodsdon’s response, that he would not produce the men because one was a prisoner of war and the other detained on federal charges was—quite appropriately—found contemptuous. He was prosecuted in private criminal contempt proceedings, and also held liable for damages in a false imprisonment action. Meanwhile the New Hampshire legislature (to whom Hodsdon apparently gave a false account of the events) passed a restoration to law statute, enabling him to overcome a missed deadline. Ultimately the United States Congress (of which his counsel, John Holmes, had become a member) granted him indemnity. These events were the subject of tart newspaper exchanges in the Concord Statesman & Register and the New-Hampshire Patriot.

"O Habeas Corpus"

2001 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 201-208
Author(s):  
E. Seguchi
Keyword(s):  
Habeas Corpus

Habeas Corpus – À Contradição Entre o Proclamado Acesso à Justiça e as Políticas Restritivas do Judiciário

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-68
Author(s):  
Rogério Pereira Leal ◽  
José Cristiano Leão Tolini
Keyword(s):  
Habeas Corpus

O uso dos direitos e das garantias fundamentais do habeas corpus, estabelecendo uma linha entre a Constituição Federal de 1988 e a Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos. A possibilidade de um Estado Parte suspender a utilização do habeas corpus mesmo em tempo de ameaça a paz social e a política, em detrimento de uma pessoa ameaçada de prisão. Trata-se de estudo comparativo acerca de uma possível proibição da impetração de habeas corpus durante o estado de sítio conforme os artigos 138 e 139 da Carta Magna, ocorrido durante a vigência do AI-5.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document