Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Ex Parte Burtis
103 U.S. 238
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1881-02-28
- Topic
- general
Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court. This is a petition for a mandamus requiring the district, judge for the eastern district of New York to compel one Eliza M. Shepherd to obey the command of a subpoena duces tecum, and produce before a special examiner certain iron patterns of an old fire-place heater, that testimony might be taken respecting them, to be certified and used on the hearing of an equity cause pending in the Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York. From the petition it appears that the judge has' already .acted on the idéntical showing made to us, and for reasons assigned in writing denied a motion for an attachment against the person named for refusing to obey the subpoena.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Ex Parte Burtis. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 20 opinions
Headnotes
- General — Mandamus — Scope of Relief Against Inferior Tribunals A writ of mandamus may be used to compel an inferior tribunal to act on a matter within its jurisdiction, but it may not be used to control that tribunal's discretion while acting, nor to reverse its decisions once made.
- General — Mandamus — Contempt Decisions Where a district judge, in the exercise of his legitimate jurisdiction, hears the parties on a request to punish a person for contempt in disobeying the process of the court and decides not to do so, that decision is beyond the reach of a writ of mandamus, even if the judge erred or the reasons assigned would not withstand judicial criticism.
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a petition for a mandamus requiring the district, judge for the eastern district of New York to compel one Eliza M. Shepherd to obey the command of a subpoena duces tecum, and produce before a special examiner certain iron patterns of an old fire-place heater, that testimony might be taken respecting them, to be certified and used on the hearing of an equity cause pending in the Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York. From the petition it appears that the judge has' already .acted on the idéntical showing made to us, and for reasons assigned in writing denied a motion for an attachment against the person named for refusing to obey the subpoena.
A writ of mandamus may be used to compel an inferior tribunal to act on a matter within its jurisdiction, but not to control its discretion while acting (Ex parte Railway Company, 101 U. S. 711), nor reverse its decisions when made. Ex parte Elippin, 94 id. 348. Both these rules are elementary, and are fatal to this application. .The district judge took jurisdiction of the matter, as it was his duty to do, heard the parties, and decided adversely, to the claim of the petitioner. In this he may have done wrong, and the reasons he has assigned may not be such as will bear the test of judicial criticism ; but we cannot, by mandamus, compel him to undo what he has thus done in the exercise of his legitimate jurisdiction. He was asked to punish a person for contempt in disobeying the process of the court. He decided not to do so. This action of his is beyond the reach of a writ of mandamus.
Petition denied.