Case ID: ga_34/html/0583-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Walker, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Peter McLaren, plaintiff in error, vs. James S. Brown, defendant in error.
    
       A certiorari may issue upon petition to the Superior Court, as provided in section 3960 of the Code, to correct an error committed hy the Justices of the Inferior Court presiding on the trial of a habeas corpus case.
    Motion to dismiss Certiorari. Decided by Judge Clark. In Bibb Superior Court. November Term, 1863.
    On the petition of McLaren, one of the Justices of the Inferior Court of Bibb county issued a writ of habeas corpus, bearing date February 27th, 1863, and returnable before said Justice and his associates on the 16th of March thereafter. On the 28th of March, at a “ special session,” the Justice who issued the writ, and two others heard the case and refused the discharge prayed for. McLaren then sued out a writ of certiorari upon this judgment, to the Superior Court.
    When the certiorari 'came up for hearing in the Superita Court, counsel for Brown, the defendant, moved to dismiss it “ on the ground that no exceptions had been filed in writing to the decision of the Justices, as required by the Code, and that the proceeding, as taken, was applicable only to Justices of the Peace and other Inferior judicatories.”
    The Court sustained the motion, and dismissed the certiorari. This is complained of as error.
    Bailey & DeGraeeenreid, for plaintiff in error.
    No appearance for defendant.
   Walker, J.

When this case was called, counsel admitted that it is controlled by the case of Chapman vs. Woodruff, 34 Ga. Rep. 91. This case was not published when the decision now complained of was made. In that case, this Court decided that a certiorari may issue irpon petition to the Superior Court, as provided in section 3960 of the Gode, to correct an error committed by the- Justices of the Inferior Court presiding on the trial of a habeas corpus case. In this case the Judge dismissed the c&rtiorari, because sued out under the provision of this section, and not under section 3958.

Judgment reversed.