IN RE PARSONS, PETITIONER. IN RE NININGER, PETITIONER

U.S. | 1893-11-06
150 U.S. 150 Supreme Court of the United States (1893) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 37 L. Ed. 1034 · 14 S. Ct. 50 · SCDB 1893-027 · 1893 U.S. LEXIS 2367
Cited by 13 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Supreme Court declined to issue writs of mandamus to overturn Circuit Court orders regarding possession of property and custody of prisoners, holding that a court acting within its jurisdiction cannot be compelled by mandamus to decide matters in a particular way or to have its judicial decisions reviewed through that extraordinary writ.

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court
Mr. Chief Justice Puller,

Mr. Chief Justice Puller,

after stating the case, delivered the opinion of the court.

The Circuit Court dealt by its orders with the possession of certain books, papers, and property, and the custody of certain prisoners, and while in so doing O’Neal and Musgrove were recognized as United States attorney and marshal, respectively, the court did not thereby undertake to determine the title to those officés. If the orders be regarded merely as directions in the administration of judicial affairs in respect of the immediate possession of property or custody of prisoners, we cannot be properly called on, by reason of anything appearing on these records, in'the exercise of áppellate jurisdiction in this manner, to direct them to be set aside. 1 And if the proceedings should be treated as involving a final determination as on issue joined of the right to such possession and custody, there was no complaint of want of notice or of hearing, and the summary mode adopted did not in itself affect the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court upon the ground that it had exceeded its powers. Without intending to intimate that the orders would have any. effect, and if so, what, on appropn ate proceedings to try title to these offices, it is enough that in our judgment the Circuit Court had jurisdiction to enter them. We cannot by writ of mandamus compel the court below to decide a matter before it in a particular way, nor can we, through the instrumentality of that writ, review its judicial action had in the exercise of legitimate jurisdiction. Ex parte Flippin, 94 U. S., 348; Ex parte Burtis, 103 U. S. 238; In re Morrison, 147 U. S. 14, 26; In re Hawkins, Petitioner, 147 U. S. 486, 490; American Construction Co. v. Jacksonville, Tampa &c. Railway Co., 148 U. S. 372, 379, 386; In re Humes, Petitioner, 149 U. S. 192.

These settled principles control the applications before us, and it follows that they must be Denied

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Ex parte Am. Steel Barrel Co. & Seaman, 230 U.S. 35 (U.S. 1913)
    …ke, it was one made in the course of the exercise of his legitimate jurisdiction under § 14 of the new Judicial Code, and we cannot compel him through a writ of mandamus to undo what has thus been done. Ex parte Burtis, 103 U. S. 238; In re Parsons, 150 U. S. 150. Aside from what has been said the long delay in asking the extraordinary remedy of mandamus would fully justify this court in the exercise of a sound discretion in. denying relief. The rule must he discharged.…
  • N.Y. Cent. & Hudson River R.R. Co. v. United States, 212 U.S. 481 (U.S. 1909)
  • In re Rice, 155 U.S. 396 (U.S. 1894)
    …resorted to, does not in itself affect the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court as having proceeded in excess of its powers, and, where notice has been given and hearing had, the result cannot properly be interfered with by mandamus. Ex parte Parsons, 150 U. S. 150. We perceive no ground for the extraordinary interposition of this court by the issue of. either of the writs applied for. Leave denied.…

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited (12 total)

View all 12 cited authorities →

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw