Ex Parte Burr,
22 U.S. 529 (1822)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Ex Parte Burr, 22 U.S. 9 Wheat. 529 529 (1822)

Ex Parte Burr

22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 529


Quare as to the authority of this Court to interfere by mandamus in the case of a removal or suspension of an attorney of the district and circuit courts.

Whatever may be the authority of this Court in that respect, it will not be exercised unless where the conduct of the court below has been grossly irregular and unjust.

In a regular complaint against an attorney, charges cannot be received and acted on unless made on oath. But he may himself waive the preliminary of an affidavit, and the court may proceed at his instance to investigate the charges, upon testimony, which must be on oath and regularly taken.

Mr. Emmett moved for a rule to show cause why a mandamus should not issue to the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia, commanding that court to restore one Burr an attorney of that court, who had been suspended from practice for one year by order of that court.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.