Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ex Parte Wilson

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1810
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/78488

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
10 U.S. 52
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ex Parte Wilson

Excerpt

.....the act of congress. wilson petitioned the court for a writ of habeas corpus and a certiorari to bring up the record of a civil cause in which judgment had been rendered against him, upon which a ca. sa. had issued, by which he was taken and was now in confinement within the prisons bounds upon a prison bounds bond. his petition stated that the marshal had demanded of the creditor the daily allowance for the prisoner agreeably to the act of congress, concerning insolvent debtors within the district of columbia, laws u.s. vol. 6, p. 301. § 15, which the creditor had refused to pay, in consequence of which the marshal had no longer any authority to detain him. the act of congress provides that the circuit court of the district of columbia shall, by a general order, fix the daily allowance for the support of prisoners in execution for debt in civil suits, and that "no person taken in execution for debt or damages in a civil suit shall be detained in prison therefor unless the creditor, his agent or attorney, shall, after demand thereof by the marshal, pay or give such security as he may require to pay such daily allowance and the prison fees." the marshal refused to discharge the petitioner, and his counsel, e. j. lee, now moved for a habeas corpus. mr. chief justice marshall, after consultation with the other judges, stated that the court was not satisfied page 10 u. s. 53 that a habeas corpus is the proper remedy in a case of arrest under a civil process. habeas corpus refused.

Full Judgment

Ex Parte Wilson - 10 U.S. 52 (1810)
U.S. Supreme Court Ex Parte Wilson, 10 U.S. 6 Cranch 52 52 (1810)

Ex Parte Wilson

10 U.S. (6 Cranch) 52

ON PETITION FOR HABEAS

CORPUS AND CERTIORARI

SYLLABUS

The Court refused to award a habeas corpus in a case where the petitioner was in confinement under a capias ad satisfaciendum and the creditors had refused to pay the daily allowance according to the provisions of the act of Congress.

Wilson petitioned the court for a writ of habeas corpus and a certiorari to bring up the record of a civil cause in which judgment had been rendered against him, upon which a ca. sa. had issued, by which he was taken and was now in confinement within the prisons bounds upon a prison bounds bond. His petition stated that the marshal had demanded of the creditor the daily allowance for the prisoner agreeably to the act of Congress, concerning insolvent debtors within the District of Columbia, Laws U.S. vol. 6, p. 301. § 15, which the creditor had refused to pay, in consequence of which the marshal had no longer any authority to detain him.

The act of Congress provides that the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia shall, by a general order, fix the daily allowance for the support of prisoners in execution for debt in civil suits, and that

"No person taken in execution for debt or damages in a civil suit shall be detained in prison therefor unless the creditor, his agent or attorney, shall, after demand thereof by the marshal, pay or give such security as he may require to pay such daily allowance and the prison fees."

The marshal refused to discharge the petitioner, and his counsel, E. J. Lee, now moved for a habeas corpus.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE MARSHALL, after consultation with the other judges, stated that the Court was not satisfied

Page 10 U. S. 53

that a habeas corpus is the proper remedy in a case of arrest under a civil process.

Habeas corpus refused.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial