•  
  •  

Home > Journals > Michigan Law Review > MLR > Volume 43 > Issue 6 (1945)

 

Abstract

Petitioner asked for a writ of mandamus to have himself reinstated as counsel in a trial. The petitioner had represented two defendants in a criminal action, up until the time the judge presiding in the trial, respondent here, ordered him dismissed from the court as the attorney of record for the defendants. The respondent had called on the various counsel in the case to explain a certain matter, which seemed, "prima facie at least," to show contempt of court. When the petitioner was called on he did not confine himself to the matter in question, but proceeded to attack the character of the respondent as a judge, and to justify an impeachment petition which he had recently filed, for the removal of the respondent from the bench. Later the respondent offered a copy of the petition for impeachment for the record, and called on the petitioner to show cause why he should not be dismissed from further participation in this case as counsel for the defendants. Following the petitioner's answer, the respondent ordered him dismissed from the trial. The petitioner had already been punished twice during the proceedings for acts of contempt. Held, petition for writ of mandamus is denied. The respondent was exercising the "elementary right of a court to protect its pending proceedings, which includes the right to dismiss from them an attorney who cannot or will not take part in them with a reasonable degree of propriety." Laughlin v. Eicher, (App. D.C., 1944) 145 F (2d) 700.

Download

Share

COinS