From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mayock v. Superintendent

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Nov 23, 1966
224 A.2d 544 (Conn. 1966)

Opinion

Argued November 1, 1966

Decided November 23, 1966

Habeas corpus alleging unlawful confinement, brought to the Superior Court in New London County and tried to the court, Bogdanski, J.; judgment dismissing the application, from which the plaintiff appealed. No error.

Joseph T. Sweeney, for the appellant (plaintiff).

No appearance for the appellee (defendant).


The application for a writ of habeas corpus is defective because it fails to state any basis for a claim of illegal confinement. Practice Book § 451. It also ignores the requirements of Practice Book § 452. If the objective of the plaintiff is to obtain an adjudication that his present mental condition does not require his confinement, he is entitled to be heard on that issue. But if he chooses habeas corpus rather than other available remedies, his application must set forth specific grounds for the issuance of the writ.


Summaries of

Mayock v. Superintendent

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Nov 23, 1966
224 A.2d 544 (Conn. 1966)
Case details for

Mayock v. Superintendent

Case Details

Full title:PETER R. MAYOCK v. SUPERINTENDENT, NORWICH STATE HOSPITAL

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Nov 23, 1966

Citations

224 A.2d 544 (Conn. 1966)
224 A.2d 544

Citing Cases

Vincenzo v. Warden

The history of our own jurisprudence is wholly in accord with these principles. "Habeas corpus provides a…

Macri v. Hayes

In a writ of habeas corpus alleging illegal confinement the application must set forth specific grounds for…