Missouri v. Lewis
Decision Date | 01 October 1879 |
Citation | 25 L.Ed. 989,101 U.S. 22 |
Parties | MISSOURI v. LEWIS |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
ERROR to the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri.
This writ of error was brought by the State of Missouri, on the relation of Frank J. Bowman, to reverse the judgment of the Supreme Court of Missouri refusing to issue a mandamus to Edward A. Lewis, Charles S. Hayden, and Robert A. Bakewell, judges of the Saint Louis Court of Appeals. The object of the mandamus was to compel the latter court to grant his application for an appeal to the said Supreme Court from a judgment of said Court of Appeals, affirming a judgment of the Circuit Court of Saint Louis County, removing Bowman, a resident of that county, from the practice of law in the State, he having by the verdict of a jury been found guilty upon charges preferred against him by the committee of prosecution of the Bar Association.
Wagner's Missouri Statutes, c. 12, p. 198, title 'Attorneys-at-Law,' contain the following provisions:—— 'SECT. 6. Any attorney or counsellor at law who shall be guilty of any felony or infamous crime, or improperly retaining his client's money, or of any malpractice, deceit, or misdemeanor in his professional capacity, may be removed or suspended from practice, upon charges exhibited and proceedings thereon had, as herein after provided.
' .
' .
' .
' .
' .
' .
' .
' .
' .
' .
' .
' .
The Constitution of Missouri adopted Oct. 30, 1875, contains the following provisions, art. 6, title 'Judicial Department:'——
' .
' .
' .
' .
' .
' .
'
The statutes of Missouri provide that 'every person aggrieved by any final judgment or decision of any circuit court, in any civil case, including cases of contested elections, may make his appeal to the Supreme Court.' Act of Feb. 28, 1871; Wagn. Mo. Stat., sect. 9, p. 159.
'In all cases of final judgment, rendered upon any indictment, an appeal to the Supreme Court [District Court] shall be allowed the defendant, if applied for during the term at which such judgment is rendered.' Gen. Stat. Mo., c. 215, sect. 1.
The act of Feb. 16, 1877, provides that,——
' . Acts of Legislature of Missouri, session 1877.
Mr. Jeremiah S. Black, Mr. George F. Edmunds, and Mr. David Wagner for the plaintiff in error.
1. Bowman, the relator, having asserted his right to appeal from the Saint Louis Court of Appeals, on the ground that the provisions limiting appeals from that court were in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and other articles of the Constitution of the United States, the jurisdiction of this court to review the judgment is clear (Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36), and the case is properly here on a writ of error. Memphis v. Brown, 94 U.S. 715; Ward v. Gregory, 7 Pet. 633; Columbian Insurance Co. v. Wheelright, 7 Wheat. 534; Dove v. Ind. School Dist., 41 Iowa, 689.
2. Missouri denies to some of its citizens the equal protection of the laws, by forbidding that access to the department administering them, which other citizens enjoy.
The right of an unrestricted appeal to the Supreme Court, granted to those residing in one hundred and nine counties of the State, is, in like cases, withheld from those residing in either of four other counties, or in the city of Saint Louis.
It cannot be answered that a hearing before the Saint Louis Court of Appeals is equivalent to that before the Supreme Court; for the State Constitution recognizes the superiority of the wisdom and power of the latter tribunal, by investing it with superintending control over all subordinate courts, and in some...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Thorn v. Jefferson County
... ... Missouri v. Lewis, 101 U.S. 22, 31, 25 L.Ed. 989, 992 (1879). (Emphasis supplied.) ... The proposition of law that the equal protection ... ...
-
Jones v. Russell
... ... Trust & Sav. Bank, 170 U.S. 283, 18 S.Ct. 594, 42 L.Ed ... 1037; Welch v. Swasey, 214 U.S. 91, 29 S.Ct. 567, 53 ... L.Ed. 923; Bowman v. Lewis, 101 U.S. 22, 25 L.Ed ... Legislation ... may be limited legally as to objects or territory if it ... operates equally on all ersons and places subject to it ... under like circumstances and conditions. Hayes v ... Missouri, 120 U.S. 68, 7 S.Ct. 350, 30 L.Ed. 578; ... Giles v. Teasley, 193 U.S. 148, 24 S.Ct. 359, 48 ... L.Ed. 655; Ocampo v. U. S., 234 U.S. 91, 34 S.Ct ... ...
-
Johnson v. Manson
... Page 846 ... 493 A.2d 846 ... 196 Conn. 309 ... Samuel Lewis JOHNSON ... John R. MANSON, Commissioner of Correction ... Supreme Court of Connecticut ... Argued Feb. 7, 1985 ... Decided May 28, 1985 ... entities,--each responsible for its own laws establishing the rights and duties of persons within its borders." (Emphasis added.) Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada, 305 U.S. 337, 350, 59 S.Ct. 232, 83 L.Ed. 208 (1938) ... It is, therefore, clear that the petitioner was ... ...
-
Albritton v. City of Winona
... ... Wilson ... v. Sanitary Trustees, 133 Ill. 445, 27 N.E. 203; In re ... House Roll No. 284, 31 Neb. 505, 48 N.W. 275; 1 ... Lewis' Sutherland on Statutory Construction (2 Ed.), sec ... 81; State v. Henry, 87 Miss. 125 ... Sections ... 182 and 192 and the Exemption ... Hardy, 169 U.S. 366, 18 S.Ct. 383, 42 L.Ed. 780; ... Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516, 4 S.Ct. 111, ... 292, 28 L.Ed. 232; Missouri v. Lewis, 101 U.S. 22, ... 25 L.Ed. 989; Hutcheson, Law as Liberator, page 113 et seq., ... and Hutcheson, "The Common Law of the ... ...