United States ex rel. Ashley v. Roper
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Hearing on an appeal by the relator from a judgment of tbe Supreme Court of tbe District of Columbia denying a writ of mandamus to compel the Secretary of the Treasury to abrogate bis decision construing an act of Congress.
Read the full summary
Hearing on an appeal by the relator from a judgment of tbe Supreme Court of tbe District of Columbia denying a writ of mandamus to compel the Secretary of the Treasury to abrogate bis decision construing an act of Congress. Tbe Court in tbe opinion stated tbe facts as follows: Tbe relator, George B. Asbley, applied to tbe lower court for a mandamus against tlie Secretary of the Treasury and the ■Commissioner of Internal Revenue, commanding them to abrogate a decision of theirs construing an act of Congress known as the Harrison Narcotic Act (38 Stat. at L. 185, chap. 1, Comp. Stat. 1916, sec.…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Smytii
He who applies for a mandamus must clearly establish his right to it. Ex parte Fleming, 2 Wall. 759, 17 L. ed. 924. It is not a writ of right. United States ex rel. Turner v. Fisher, 222 U. S. 204, 209, 56 L. ed. 165, 168, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 37; Garfield v. United States, 31 App. D. C. 332, 335. At the very outset the right of the relater to maintain the action is challenged. He does not allege that the druggist would refill the prescription if it were not for the decision of the Treasury officials. For aught that appears the druggist may have had many reasons, other than the one assigned, for…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Truax v. RaichSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- United States v. Jin Fuey MoySupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Decatur v. PauldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1840
- Mississippi v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Roberts v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.