Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

was not in the record and before the court. After a case has proceeded to the filing of a declaration and a plea to the jurisdiction, or its equivalent, and judgment in favor of the plea and for a dismissal of the action; the plaintiff is confined to his remedy by writ of error, and cannot by mandamus compel the inferior court to take jurisdiction of his case.5

The writ may issue: to compel a Circuit Court of Appeals to take jurisdiction of a writ of error, which it has improperly dismissed ; 6 but not to compel a District Court to remand a case because of a slip in practice, such as a failure to serve notice of the filing of the petition, nor because it has been removed to an improper district, nor where jurisdiction is improperly claimed upon the ground of a separable controversy between citizens of different States, 10 nor where there is a controversy as to whether the suit is of a civil nature or for a penalty,11 nor where a difference of citizenship appears, but the record does not show the residence of one or more of the parties unless the application is by a State, 18 a public minister or a consul, except possibly under extraordinary circumstances, in any case where jurisdiction is claimed because of difference of citizenships 14 or because it arises under the Constitution and

12

nor

4 Re Sherman, 124 U. S. 364, 31 L. ed. 423.

6 Ex parte Baltimore & 0. R. Co., 108 U. S. 566, 27 L. ed. 812; Ex parte Railway Co., 103 U. S. 794, 26 L. ed. 461; Re Pennsylvania Co., 137 U. S. 451, 453, 34 L. ed. 738, 739.

6 Matter of Christensen Eng. Co., 194 U. S. 458, 48 L. ed. 1072; Re Merchants' Stock & Grain Co., 223 U. S. 639, 56 L. ed. 584.

7 U. 8. v. Sessions, C. C. A., 205 Fed. 502.

8 Ibid.

9 Ex parte Park Square Automobile Station, 244 U. S. 412.

10 Re Pollitz, 206 U. S. 323, 51 L. ed. 1081, in which the writer was counsel; Ex parte Nebraska, 209 U. S. 436, 52 L. ed. 876; Ex parte

Harding, 219 U. S. 363, 55 L. ed. 252.

11 Ex parte Gruetter, 217 U. S. 586, 54 L. ed. 892.

12 Ibid.

13 Virginia v. Rives, 100 U. S. 313, 323, 329, 25 L. ed. 667, 671, 673; Virginia v. Paul, 148 U. S. 107, 37 L. ed. 386; Kentucky v. Powers, 201 U. S. 1, 50 L. ed. 633.

14 Ex parte Hoard, 105 U. S. 578, 26 L. ed. 1176; Ex parte Harding, 219 U. S. 363, 55 L. ed. 252; overruling in this respect Ex parte Wisner, 203 U. S. 449, 51 L. ed. 264; Re Moore, 209 U. S. 490, 52 L. ed. 904; and disapproving Re Winn, 213 U. S. 458, 53 L. ed. 873, which holds that the question whether the cause of action arises under the Constitution or laws of the United laws of the United States 15 when the question may be reviewed upon appeal or writ of error.

The writ may issue to compel a District Judge of the United States to order the marshal to deliver to the county jailer certain prisoners convicted under indictments, or other criminal proceedings, illegally removed to the District Court of the United States; 16 to compel the allowance of an appeal, 17 provided the applicant was a party to the suit; 18 to compel a judge to settle a bill of exceptions and to sign the bill after he has settled it ; 19 or after it has been presented in duly proper form ; 20 but not to extend the time for the preparation and settlement of a bill of exceptions, 21 nor to re-instate a bill of exceptions which after a hearing upon the merits has been stricken out,22 nor to sign a bill of exceptions which he considers not to state correctly the proceedings before him,23 although, he may be thus compelled to settle such part thereof as correctly sets forth any of the proceedings; 24 to compel a court to proceed in a suit which it has improperly stayed ; 25 to compel a judge to set aside an order

States may be reviewed by manda

mus.

15 Ex parte Roe, 234 U. S. 70; but see Re Winn, 213 U. S. 458, 53 L. ed. 873.

16 Virginia v. Rives, 100 U. S. 313, 323, 329, 25 L. ed. 667, 671, 673; Virginia v. Paul, 148 U. S. 107, 37 L. ed. 386; Kentucky v. Powers, 201 U. S. 1, 50 L. ed. 633.

17 Ex parte Jordan, 94 U. S. 248, 24 L. ed. 123; Ex parte Railroad Co., 95 U. S. 221, 24 L. ed. 355; Vigo's Case, 21 Wall. 648, 22 L. ed. 690. But it was said that the writ may be denied where the order appealed from was wholly discretionary, and where the discretion was properly exercised. Lewis v. Baltimore & L. R. Co., C. C. A., 62 Fed. 218.

18 Ex parte Cutting, 94 U. S. 14, 24 L. ed. 49.

19 Chateaugay 0. & I. Co., Peti

tioner, 128 U. S. 544, 32 L. ed. 508. See Ex parte Crane, 5 Pet. 189, 190, 8 L. ed. 92, 93.

20 Re Federal Life Ins. Co., C. C. A., 248 Fed. 908.

21 Camden Iron Works Co. v. Sater, C. C. A., 223 Fed. 611,

22 Ex parte First Nat. Bank of Dexter, 228 U. S. 516.

23 Ex parte Bradstreet, 4 Pet. 102, 7 L. ed. 796; Black v. Youmans, C. C. A., 245 Fed. 460.

24 Black v. Youmans, C. C. A., 245 Fed. 460.

25 Livingston Dorgenois, 7 Cranch, 577, 3 L. ed. 444; Barber Asphalt Pav. Co. v. Morris, C. C. A., 67 L.R.A. 761, 132 Fed. 945; McClellan v. Carland, 217 U. S. 268, 54 L. ed. 762; Postal Telegraph. Cable Co. v. Call, C. C. A., 255 Fed. 850; but see Re Lasserot, C. C. A., 240 Fed. 325.

[ocr errors]

denying an injunction and vacating a restraining order which he has previously granted forbidding action by an officer of a State; 26 to set aside an order beyond its jurisdiction made subsequent to a final decree, 27 to take jurisdiction of a writ of scire facias which it has improperly quashed ; 28 to prescribe the method and direct the service of a writ of scire facias, and, after due service, to take jurisdiction of, and to decide, issues raised thereupon ; 29 to compel a judge to restore a case to the jury calendar after he has improperly directed that it be transferred to the equity docket ; 30 to allow papers filed in a court to be produced for evidence in another suit ; 31 to compel a court to proceed to judgment,82 and when the act of signing the judgment was purely ministerial to sign it; 33 to execute a judgment it has rendered ; 34 to set aside the suspension of a sentence; 85 to execute a previous mandate of the Supreme Court,36 or of a Circuit Court of Appeals; 37 and to compel the reinstatement in a court of the United States or of the District of Columbia

26 Ex parte Metropolitan Water Co., 220 U. S. 539, 55 L. ed. 575.

27 New Liverpool Salt Co. v. Wellborn, C. C. A., 160 Fed. 923; Re Dennett, . C. C. A., 215 Fed. 673. But see Ex parte Bradstreet, 8 Pet. 588, 8 L. ed. 1054.

28 Re Connaway, 178 U. S. 421, 44 L. ed. 1134.

29 Collin County Nat. Bank of McKinney Tex. v. Hughes, C. C. A., 152 Fed. 414.

30 Ex parte Simons, 247 U. S. 231; in which the author was counsel. Contra Ex parte Mason, C. C. A., 254 Fed. 154.

31 Ex parte Uppercu, 239 U. S. 435.

32 Life & Fire Ins. Co. v. Wilson, 8 Pet. 291, 8 L. ed. 949; Life & Fire Ins. Co. V. Adams, 9 Pet. 571, 9 L. ed. 233; Re Watts, C. C. A., 214 Fed. 80.

33 Ex parte Bradstreet, 6 Pet. 774, 8 L. ed. 577; Life & Fire Ins.

Co. y. Wilson, 8 Pet. 291, 8 L. ed. 949; Ex parte Many, 14 How. 24, 14 L. ed. 311. But see Ex parte Morgan, 114 U. S. 174, 29 L. ed. 135; Re Watts, C. C. A., 214 Fed. 80.

34 U. S. v. Peters, 5 Cranch, 115, 3 L. ed. 53; Stafford v. Union Bank, 16 How. 135, 14 L. ed. 876.

35 Ex parte U. S., 242 U. S. 27.

36 White v. U. S., 1 Black, 501, 17 L. ed. 227; U. S. v. Fossatt, 21 How. 445, 16 L. ed. 186; Ex parte Dubuque & P. R. Co., 1 Wall. 69, 17 L. ed. 514; Re Washington & G. R. Co., 140 U. S. 91; infra, Chapter on Writs of Error and Appeals. But see Ex parte Railway Co., 101 U. S. 711, 25 L. ed. 872; Re Humes, 149 U. S. 192, 37 L .ed. 698; supra,

457a. 37 Ex parte Chicago Title & Tr. Co., C. C. A., 146 Fed. 742; Re Beckwith, C. C. A., 203 Fed. 45, S. C., 201 Fed. 518, supra, $ 457b.

8$ 457,

of an attorney who had been disbarred, in a case of which the court had no jurisdiction or acted with flagrant impropriety. 88

A mandamus will not be issued when there is any other appropriate relief,39_-as, for example, by writ of error or appeal, 40 or certiorari,41_nor to control the exercise of discretion, 4% except, possibly, in case of a very flagrant abuse of discretion.48 The writ of mandamus has been denied when asked to compel a court or judge to allow or refuse an amendment of a pleading, 44 to strike impertinent matter from a pleading ; 45 to order a withdrawal of a plea ; 46 to allow the filing of double pleas; 47 to allow an intervention; 48 to grant the applicant a revivor ; 49 to set aside the designation of a judge to hear a proceeding in the place of

38 Ex parte Bradley, 7 Wall. 364, 19 L. ed. 214; Ex parte Robinson, 19 Wall. 506, 22 L. ed. 205. But see Ex parte Burr, 9 Wheat, 529, 6 L. ed. 152; Ex parte Secombe, 19 How. 9, 15 L. ed. 565; Ex parte Wall. 107 U. S. 265, 27 L. ed. 552; Re Green, 141 U. S. 325, 35 L. ed. 765. But see Barnes v. Lyons, C. C. A., 187 Fed. 881.

39 Bank of Columbia v. Sweeny, 1 Pet. 567, 7 L. ed. 265; U. S. v. Addison, 22 How. 174, 16 L. ed. 304; Ex parte Newman, 14 Wall. 152, 20 L. ed. 877; Re Morrison, 147 U, S. 14, 26, 37 L. ed. 60, 65.

40 Ex parte Newman, 14: Wall. 152, 20 L. ed. 877; Ex parte Baltimore & 0. R. Co., 108 U. S. 566, 27 L. ed. 812; Ex parte Brown, 116 U. S. 401, 29 L. ed. 676; Connecti. cut Mut. L. Ins. Co., Petitioner, 131 U. S. App. clxxxi; Re Morrison, 147 U. S. 14, 26, 37 L. ed. 60, 65; Am. Constr. Co. v. Jacksonville, T. & K. W. Ry. Co., 148 U. S. 372, 379, 37 L. ed. 486, 489; Ex parte Roe, 234 U. S. 70; E. parte Park Square Automobile Station, 244 U. S. 412; Re L. S. Starrett Co., C. C. A., 204 Fed. 588; U. 8. v. Sessions, C. C. A., 205 Fed. 502; Re Duncan, C. C. A.,

249 Fed. 155. An appeal from an interlocutory injunction affords an adequate remedy. Ex parte Oklahoma, 220 U. S. 191, 55 L. ed. 431; Dowagiac Mfg. Co. v. McSherry Mfg. Co., C. C. A., 155 Fed. 524.

41 Ex parte Park Square Automo. bile Station, 244 U. S. 412.

42 Ex parte Railway Co., 101 U. S. 711, 25 L. ed. 872; Ex parte Rob. erts, 6 Pet. 216, 8 L. ed. 375; Ex parte Davenport, 6 Pet. 661, 8 L. ed. 537; Ex parte Bradstreet, 7 Pet. 634, 8 L. ed. 810; Ex parte Bradstreet, 4 Pet. 102, 7 L. ed. 796; Ex parte Bradstreet, 8 Pet. 588, 8 L. ed. 1054; Ex parte Milwaukee R. Co., 5 Wall. 188, 18 L. ed. 676; Life & Fire Ins. Co. v. Wilson, 8 Pet. 291, 8 L. ed. 949.

43 Ex parte Bradley, 7 Wall. 364,, 19 L. ed. 214.

44 Ex parte Bradstreet, 7 Pet. 634, 8 L. ed. 810.

45 Lovell-McConnell Mfg. Co. v. Brindrim, C. C. A., 219 Fed. 533.

46 Ex parte Sweeny, 1 Pet. 567, 7 L. ed. 265.

47 Ex parte Davenport, 6 Pet. 661, 8 L. ed. 537.

48 Re Engelhard, 231 U. S. 646.
49 Ex parte Slater, 246 U. S. 128,

one who had retired for reasons alleged to be insufficient; 50 upon the application of a private individual, to remand a civil case after a motion for a remand had been denied by the court below; 61 to retain jurisdiction of a case which had been remanded to the State court since the act of March 3, 1887; 5% to vacate interlocutory orders which did not terminate the suit; 68 to Vacate a preliminary injunction ; 54 to vacate an order setting aside a non-suit'; 65 to punish a party for an alleged contempt ; 56. to open a default; 57 to quash a writ of execution ; 88 to admit a prisoner to bail; 59 to diminish the amount of bail required for a prisoner's discharge; 60 to approve a bond ; 61 to compel the issue of a subpoena duces tecum; 62 to compel a witness to answer specified questions; 68 to grant a rehearing ; 64 to receive further proofs on an appeal in admiralty ; 66 to vacate an order directing a district attorney and a marshal to deliver the official books of

50 Ex parte Am. Steel Barrel Co., 230 U. S. 35.

61 Ex parte Hoard, 105 U. S. 578, 26 L. ed. 1178; Re Pollitz, 206 U. S. 323, 51 L. ed. 1081; Ex parte Nebraska, 209 U. S. 436, 52 L. ed. 876; Ex parte Harding, 219 U. S. 363, 55 L. ed. 252; Ex parte Roe, 234 U. S. 70; Ex parte Park Square Automobile Station, 244 U. S. 412. See supra.

52 Re Pennsylvania Co., 137 U. S. 451, 453, 34 L. ed. 738, 739.

58 Ex parte Hoyt, 13 Pet. 279, 10 L. ed. 161; Ex parte Whitney, 13 Pet. 404, 10 L. ed. 221; Gain v. Relf, 15 Pet. 9, 10 L. ed. 642; Ex parte Perry, 102 U. S. 183, 26 L. ed. 43; Ex parte Schwab, 98 U. S. 240, 25 L. ed. 105; Am. Constr. Co. v. Jacksonville, T. & K. W. Ry. Co., 148 U. S. 372, 379, 37 L. ed. 486, 489.

64 Ex parte Schwab, 98 U. S. 240, 25 L. ed. 105.

56 Ex parte Loring, 94 U. S. 418, 24 L. ed. 165.

56 Minnesota Moline Plow Co. v.

Dowagiac Mfg. Co., C. C. A., 126
Fed. 746.

57 Ex parte Roberts, 6 Pet. 216, 8 L. ed. 375.

58 U. S. ex rel. Harless v. Judges, C. C. A., 85 Fed. R. 178.

59 Ex parte Flippin, 94 U. S. 348, 24 L. ed. 194; U. S. ex rel. Harless v. Judges, C. C. A., 85 Fed. 177. But see Hudson v. Parker, 156 U. S. 277, 39 L. ed. 424.

60 Ex parte. Taylor, 14 How. 3, 14 L. ed. 302.

61 Ex parte Milwaukee R. Co., 5 Wall. 188, 18 L. ed. 676.

62 Vacuum Cleaner Co. v. Platt, C. C. A., 196 Fed. 398.

But see Dowagiac Mfg. Co. v. Lochren, C. C. A., 143 Fed. 211.

63 Re Welsh Mfg. Co., C. C. A., 201 Fed. 519; but see Vacuum Cleaner Co. v. Platt, C. C. A., 196 Fed. 398. But see Dowagiac Mfg. Co. v. Lochren, C. C. A., 143 Fed. 211.

64 U. S. v. Bullock, 6 Pet. 485, note, 8 L. ed. 473, note.

65 Re Hawkins, 147 U. S. 486, 37 L. ed. 251.

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »