The court ultimately directed that the cause be put in abeyance to allow proponents of the annexation the opportunity to file a writ of prohibition, which they did on February 10, 1947.

He immediately sought a writ of prohibition.

* In extraordinary circumstances, the United States court of appeals can use the common-law writ of prohibition under the All Writs Act to control proceedings in the district courts.

* The writ of prohibition is issued by a higher court to a lower court prohibiting it from taking up a case because it falls outside the jurisdiction of the lower court.

Although the rest of this article speaks to judicial processes, a writ of prohibition may be directed by any court of record ( i. e., higher than a misdemeanor court ) toward any official body, whether a court or a county, city or town government, that is within the court's jurisdiction.

A " writ of prohibition ", in the United States, is an official legal document drafted and issued by a supreme court, superior court or an appeals court to a judge presiding over a suit in an inferior court.

The writ of prohibition mandates the inferior court to cease any action over the case because it may not fall within that inferior court's jurisdiction.

In criminal proceedings, a defendant who has been committed for trial may petition to the superior court for a writ of prohibition, in this case on the ground that his conduct, even if proven, does not constitute the offense charged.

The writ of prohibition may not be used to undo any previous acts, but only to prohibit acts not completed.

However, unlike a writ of prohibition, superior courts issue writs of certiorari to review decisions which inferior courts have already made.

A writ of prohibition is issued primarily to prevent an inferior court or tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction in cases pending before it or acting contrary to the rules of natural justice.

When the court, before whom the matter is pending, has ceased to exist, in that condition too, the writ of prohibition will not lie because there can be no proceedings upon which it can operate but on the other hand, if the court is functioning, the writ can be issued at any stage of the proceeding before the inferior court or tribunal.

In KUTV, Inc. v. Conder, media representatives sought review by appeal and by a writ of prohibition of an order barring the media from using the words " Sugarhouse rapist " or disseminating any information on past convictions of defendant during the pendency of a criminal trial.

* ( v ) in which a writ of mandamus or prohibition or an injunction is sought against an officer of the Commonwealth.

This includes matters in which " a writ of Mandamus or prohibition or an injunction is sought against an officer of the Commonwealth ".

The bulk of matters falling within this category often are called the " extraordinary writs " and include habeas corpus, mandamus, quo warranto, and the writ of prohibition.

However, where lower courts are concerned, an erroneous refusal to recuse in a clear case can be reviewed on appeal or, under extreme circumstances, by a petition for a writ of prohibition.

In the Supreme Court, in which review in most cases is available only if the Court exercises its discretion and grants a writ of certiorari.

There is no corresponding right to a writ in any pure or continental civil law legal systems, though some mixed systems such as Quebec recognize these prerogative writs.

§ 68 VwVGO rules the preliminary proceeding, called “ Vorverfahren ” or “ Widerspruchsverfahren ”, which is a stringent prerequisite for the administrative procedure, if an action for rescission or a writ of mandamus against an authority is aimed.

In respect of the High Court, historically a writ of latitat would have been issued, but now a bench warrant is issued, authorizing the tipstaff to arrange for the arrest of the individual, and imprisonment until the date and time the court appoints to next sit.

Although there is no writ of habeas corpus or bail, the maximum period of pre-trial detention has been reduced to four days.

(; Latin: " you must present the person in court ") is a writ ( legal action ) which requires a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court.

A writ of habeas corpus, also known as the Great Writ, is a summons with the force of a court order ; it is addressed to the custodian ( a prison official for example ) and demands that a prisoner be taken before the court, and that the custodian present proof of authority, allowing the court to determine whether the custodian has lawful authority to detain the person.

One reason for the writ to be sought by a person other than the prisoner is that the detainee might be held incommunicado.

The writ of habeas corpus is one of what are called the " extraordinary ", " common law ", or " prerogative writs ", which were historically issued by the English courts in the name of the monarch to control inferior courts and public authorities within the kingdom.

The writ is referred to in full in legal texts as habeas corpus ad subjiciendum or more rarely ad subjiciendum et recipiendum.

It is sometimes described as the “ great writ ”.

The word habeas in the writ is in the subjunctive ( specifically the volitive subjunctive ): " We command that you have ...".

The full name of the writ is often used to distinguish it from similar ancient writs, also named habeas corpus.

Blackstone explained the basis of the writ, saying " The King is at all times entitled to have an account, why the liberty of any of his subjects is restrained, wherever that restraint may be inflicted.

The wording of the writ of habeas corpus implies that the prisoner is brought to the court for the legality of the imprisonment to be examined.

However, rather than issuing the writ immediately and waiting for the return of the writ by the custodian, modern practice in England is for the original application to be followed by a hearing with both parties present to decide the legality of the detention, without any writ being issued.

The writ of habeas corpus as a procedural remedy is part of Australia's English law inheritance.

The writ is available where there is no other adequate remedy.

Under the Criminal Code of Canada the writ is largely unavailable if a statutory right of appeal exists, whether or not this right has been exercised.

Later, the king started to create new baronies in one of two ways: by a writ of summons directing a chosen man to attend Parliament, and in an even later development by letters patent.

A mittimus is a writ issued by a court or magistrate, directing the sheriff or other executive officer to convey the person named in the writ to a prison or jail, and directing the jailor to receive and imprison the person.

Certiorari (,, or ) is a type of writ seeking judicial review, recognized in U. S., Roman, English, Philippine, and other law, meaning an order by a higher court directing a lower court, tribunal, or public authority to send the record in a given case for review.

* The writ of certiorari is issued to a lower court directing that the record of a case be sent up for review, together with all supporting files, evidence and documents, usually with the intention of overruling the judgement of the lower court.

In that example, the Court of King's Bench had issued a writ of latitat directing the King's Sheriff to arrest the named person and present him before the court at a specified time and place.

The federal court in Alabama issued a writ directing the previous attorney to relinquish the documents.

In English law, a writ of scire facias ( from the Latin meaning, literally " let them / him / us know ") was a writ founded upon some judicial record directing the sheriff to make the record known ( scire facias ) to a specified party, and requiring that defendant to show cause why the party bringing the writ should not be able to cite that record in his own interest, or why, in the case of letters patent and grants, the patent or grant should not be annulled and vacated.

On June 2, 2005 the California Court of Appeals for the 6th District issued an Order to Show Cause, directing Apple to show the Court " why a peremptory writ should not issue as requested in the petition " filed by the online journalists, and held a hearing with oral argument on April 20, 2006.