Hugh Sawyer v. Ben F. Overton

Fifth Circuit

Hugh Sawyer v. Ben F. Overton

595 F.2d 252, 1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 14638

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 17, 1979

Docket78-3312

StatusPublished

Cited by26 cases

This text of 595 F.2d 252 (Hugh Sawyer v. Ben F. Overton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hugh Sawyer v. Ben F. Overton, 595 F.2d 252, 1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 14638 (5th Cir. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Sawyer is a Florida lawyer who was disciplined by a judicial order of the Florida Supreme Court. He filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking declaratory and injunctive relief “vacating the opinion of the Florida Supreme Court ordering the three month suspension of plaintiff” and for a judgment against the judges of the panel which disciplined him “in the amount of $2,070.23 to reimburse plaintiff for the amount he was ordered to pay as costs of the disciplinary proceedings.” The district court dismissed for want of jurisdiction and we affirm.

Among the several answers to plaintiff’s claim, a basic and dispositive one is that we hold no warrant to review final judgments of the Florida Supreme Court. That power is reserved to the Supreme Court of the United States. Complaining of constitutional violations, Mr. Sawyer has cast his complaint in the form of a civil rights suit. What he seeks, however, is simply reversal of the state court judgment. We have scrutinized the state proceedings and find them to be manifestly judicial ones. They could have been reviewed in the Supreme Court. In re Summers, 325 U.S. 561, 65 S.Ct. 1307, 89 L.Ed. 1795 (1945). Mr. Sawyer has boarded the wrong flight.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Sawyer is a Florida lawyer who was disciplined by a judicial order of the Florida Supreme Court. He filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking declaratory and injunctive relief “vacating the opinion of the Florida Supreme Court ordering the three month suspension of plaintiff” and for a judgment against the judges of the panel which disciplined him “in the amount of $2,070.23 to reimburse plaintiff for the amount he was ordered to pay as costs of the disciplinary proceedings.” The district court dismissed for want of jurisdiction and we affirm.

Among the several answers to plaintiff’s claim, a basic and dispositive one is that we hold no warrant to review final judgments of the Florida Supreme Court. That power is reserved to the Supreme Court of the United States. Complaining of constitutional violations, Mr. Sawyer has cast his complaint in the form of a civil rights suit. What he seeks, however, is simply reversal of the state court judgment. We have scrutinized the state proceedings and find them to be manifestly judicial ones. They could have been reviewed in the Supreme Court. In re Summers, 325 U.S. 561, 65 S.Ct. 1307, 89 L.Ed. 1795 (1945). Mr. Sawyer has boarded the wrong flight.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

595 F.2d 252, 1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 14638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hugh-sawyer-v-ben-f-overton-ca5-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack