Legal Opinion

In re Shoemaker

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 16, 1896No. Appeal, No. 82PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 82, Nov. T., 1896, by Williams A. Shoemaker, an attorney at law, from the decree of the court of O. & T. of Phila. Co., suspending appellant from his office of attorney for the period of one year. Rule to show cause why William A. Shoemaker should not be disbarred from practice as an attorney. Before Thayer, P. J., Arnold and Willson, JJ. The facts sufficiently appear from the opinion of Thayer, P. J., in support of the order of the court suspending appellant from his office of attorney for the period of one year from the date of said order. The offense with which the respondent,…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Smith, J.,

This is an appeal by William A. Shoemaker, an attorney at law, from the decree of the court of oyer and terminer of Philadelphia, suspending him from his office of attorney for a period of one year. Under the provisions of the act of May 19, 1879, the appellant is entitled to have his case reviewed de novo. Whether that part of the act allowing new testimony to be submitted in the appellate court is of any force here in view of the act of June 24, 1895, providing that this court shall have no original jurisdiction except on writs of habeas corpus, need not be considered,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

Ex Parte WallSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
Ex Parte BradleySupreme Court of the United States · 1869
In re DaviesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
In Re John PercyNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
Petition of SplaneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

Barach's CaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
Stone v. Board of Governance of Pennsylvania BarSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933