Legal Opinion

Alvord v. United States

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided April 18, 1879PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to the Supreme Court of the Territory of Idaho. Motion to reinstate cause dismissed under Rule 16.

1Judgment of the CourtChief Justice Waite

This application comes directly within the rule laid down in Hurley v. Jones, 97 U. S. 318. As we took occasion to say in that case, “ our rules requiring causes to be ready for hearing when reached are and will continue to be rigidly enforced.” We recognize no pro forma attorneys of record. Counsel who enter their appearance under the requirements of Rule 9 must understand that the court will hold them responsible for all that such an entry implies until they relieve themselves from the obligation they assume, by substitution or otherwise.

Motion denied.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hurley v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1878

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Heaton Peninsular Button-Fastener Co. v. Schlocht-MeyerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern Ohio · 1895
  2. Florsheim v. SchillingUnited States Circuit Court · 1886