Westbrook v. Wicks
Westbrook and Skinner v. Wicks
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Day, J.
— The petition alleges in substance, that in the .district court of Hamilton county, Henrietta Westbrook procured a decree of divorce from her husband, Lyman West-brook, and was awarded in fee simple certain real estate, subject to the payment to Lyman Westbrook, of $150, one-half in one year, and one-half in two years, which was declared a lien on her real estate.
That the plaintiff1, J. Skinner, defended Lyman Westbrook, in the divorce proceeding, and that he notified Harriet that he -•claimed a lien of $50, for attorney’s fees, on the sums she was directed to pay her husband. That plaintiff requested Wicks, who is clerk of the Hamilton district court, to issue execution .against Harriet Westbrook, for the enforcement of his lien, and that the clerk refused to issue such execution, stating that he had been ordered by the district judge that plaintiff was not -entitled to such execution. The giving of this advice to the *383 clerk is alleged as the reason for applying in this court for the writ of mandamus. We have no jurisdiction in the premises. This court is one of appellate jurisdiction. Rev., § 2631; Const., art. 5, § 4. A writ of mandamus issues from the district court. Rev., § 3761.
It may issue from the supreme court to a district court, if necessary, and in any other case where it is found necessary to enable it to exercise its legitimate power Rev., § 3764. This is not such a case. The express grant of a power in enumerated cases implies a negation of it in those not mentioned.
Expressio unius est exelusio alteri/us.
The writ is
Refused.,
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.