Porter v. Sheriff of Allegany County

Prescott, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an application for leave to appeal by Clarence T. Porter from a denial of a writ of habeas corptis by Chief Judge Plenderson of the Circuit Court for Allegany County, on September 13, 1956, after a hearing. The petitioner had been sued by his wife on the Equity side of that Court in May of 1954, wherein she requested a divorce, alimony and her share of the proceeds of certain bonds. To this suit, petitioner filed an answer and a cross-bill, being represented by several successive lawyers.

In due course, the matter came on for hearing in May of 1955. His then counsel appeared and notified the Court that counsel, although ⁶³² diligent efforts had been made, was unable to contact petitioner or to get any reply from his correspondence, telephone calls or telegrams to petitioner. The Court heard the testimony of the wife and her witnesses; and sometime thereafter on August 17, 1955, signed a decree granting her a limited divorce, and ruled she was the owner of, and entitled to receive from petitioner, one-half of the U. S. Savings Bonds previously purchased by the parties. The petitioner was ordered to forthwith deliver to the wife one-half of said bonds or their equivalent value in cash; and he was directed to pay her $100 per month as alimony.

On September 15, 1955, an appeal was noted by petitioner’s counsel to the Court of Appeals. Counsel filed a petition in which he requested permission to withdraw his appearance as solicitor for Porter. In this petition counsel stated that after the above decree, he had contacted Porter and informed him of what had transpired, but counsel was unable to get him to appear or come into Court; that Porter had advised counsel he wanted to appeal, and even though counsel was unable to get him to appear in Cumberland or discuss the question of what should be done, counsel had noted the appeal; and, that counsel had no means of knowing where to contact petitioner. The record does not disclose what disposition was made of this appeal.

In May of 1956, the wife’s' counsel filed a petition alleging Porter had made no attempt to comply with the Court’s order. It stated that immediately after the passage of the order, petitioner had removed himself from the jurisdiction of the Court. It further alleged Porter was believed to be