United States Ex Rel. Tietz v. Secretary of the Navy

Good Law
156 F. Supp. 174·1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2753
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaOctober 23, 19572071California3,442 words

Opinion

Opinion

Carter, J.

Petitioner having filed his petition for writ of habeas corpus, injunction, mandamus and declaratory relief on September 20, 1957, and this Court having on the same day issued its order to the respondent to show cause why any or all of said writs or relief should not issue or should not be granted as the case may be, the respondent thereafter appearing for himself and for no other person, made his return to said petition. The parties thereafter appearing in open Court on September 30, 1957, before the Honorable James M. Carter, United States District Judge, .the petitioner appearing both in person and by his counsel, J. B. Tietz and Anthony V. Randles, and the respondent appearing, by his counsel, the United States Attorney with Lt. Colonel Vernon A. Peltzer, U. S. Marine Corps and Commander Richard J. Selman, U. S. Navy, both of counsel, by Jordan A. Dreifus, Assistant U. S. Attorney, the parties thereat having stipulated that the Petition be deemed a traverse to the return, the petitioner thereupon having amended his petition by adding certain averments thereto, the respondent thereafter having generally denied each and all of the added averments with leave to further amend his…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.