Ex Parte Robinson
Supreme Court of the United States
[On Appeal.] Before the application for a mandamus was made to this court, as above reported, the petitioner, Robinson, had appealed from the order of the District Court disbarring him. The record being filed, he moved that the case be advanced on the calendar for hearing.
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Justice CLIFFORD,
after stating the facts respecting the order disbarring the appellant, delivered the opinion of the court as follows:
The petitioner moves the court to advance the case. Cases involving great hardships are frequently brought here for revision, and in such cases it is competent for the court to advance the same on motion. Still the motion must be denied, as it is well-settled law that neither an appeal nor a writ of error will lie in such a case. Hence it was held in the case of Ex parte Bradley, that mandamus from this court to a subordinate court was a proper-remedy to…
2Cited by136 opinions
- Eash v. Riggins Trucking Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- United States v. Richard A. HornCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
- Steven Mark Lasar v. Ford Motor Company, and Lawrence SutterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Jackie Kleiner v. The First National Bank of Atlanta, Hansell & Post, Richard Kirby and Richard M. Langway, George W. Morosani v. The First National Bank of Atlanta, Hansell & Post, Richard Kirby and Richard M. LangwayCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1985
- In the Matter of Hipp, Inc., Debtor. Thomas J. Griffith, Trustee v. David OlesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990
131 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.