Memphis and Shelby County Bar Ass'n v. Himmelstein

Decision Date23 July 1932
Citation53 S.W.2d 378,165 Tenn. 102
PartiesMEMPHIS AND SHELBY COUNTY BAR ASS'N v. HIMMELSTEIN.
CourtTennessee Supreme Court

Appeal from Chancery Court, Shelby County; M. C. Ketchum Chancellor.

Proceeding by the Memphis and Shelby County Bar Association against H D. Himmelstein. From an order suspending defendant from the practice of law, he appeals. On plaintiff's motion to transfer the case to the Court of Appeals.

Motion granted.

Clarence E. Clifton, W. G. Hall, F. M. Henderson and Auvergne Williams, all of Memphis, for appellant.

R. E King and Caruthers Ewing, Jr., both of Memphis, for appellee.

GREEN C.J.

In this cause the defendant was suspended from the practice of law and appealed to this court. A motion is made to transfer the case to the Court of Appeals, and this motion must be granted.

Prior to the adoption of the Code of 1932, jurisdiction of appeals in such cases was clearly in the Court of Appeals, as we have often decided. In opposition to the motion to transfer, it is urged that section 9977 of the Code provides for an appeal to this court. This section was taken from chapter 42 of the Acts of 1919 (section 4), without change.

On the contrary, section 10618 of the Code, taken without change from chapter 100 of the Acts of 1925 (section 10), provides that: "The jurisdiction of the court of appeals *** shall extend to all civil cases except those involving constitutional questions, the right to hold a public office workmen's compensation, state revenue, mandamus, in the nature of quo warranto, ouster, habeas corpus, and excepting cases which have been finally determined in the lower court on demurrer or other method not involving a review or determination of the facts, or in which all the facts have been stipulated."

That is to say the Code includes these two acts without material change, and accordingly it must be held that the Code...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Shelton v. Hickman
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • March 13, 1943
    ... ... in Error from Circuit Court, Davidson County; A. B. Neil, ...          Proceedings ... 62; Collier ... v. City of Memphis, 4 Tenn.App. 322; Kelly v ... Cannon, 22 Tenn.App. 34, ...          In ... Memphis and Shelby County Bar Association v ... Himmelstein, 165 Tenn. 102, ... ...
  • Ackerman v. Marable
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • December 22, 1934
    ... ... from Chancery Court, Washington County; Hon. S.E. Miller, ... Chancellor ... Kennedy, 164 Tenn ... 470, 474, 51 S.W.2d 1000; Memphis & Shelby County Bar ... Association v. Himmelstein, 165 ... ...
  • Woodroof v. City of Nashville
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • March 5, 1946
    ...Such being the situation, we think § 13 of the code is applicable and to this effect, in addition to Memphis and Shelby County Bar Association v. Himmelstein, supra, State v. Safley, Chairman, et al., 172 Tenn. 385, 112 S.W.2d 831. Aside from § 13 of the code there are certain well settled ......
  • Taylor v. State
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • October 22, 1932
    ... ... to Circuit Court, Cocke County; James L. Drinnon, Judge ...          Al ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT