Wilson v. Remley

Supreme Court of Iowa

Wilson v. Remley

76 N.W. 843, 106 Iowa 583

CourtSupreme Court of Iowa

DecidedOctober 25, 1898

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 76 N.W. 843 (Wilson v. Remley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wilson v. Remley, 76 N.W. 843, 106 Iowa 583 (iowa 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

Deemer, C. J.

Plaintiff is an attorney at law who was disbarred from practice in the courts of this state by the district court of Linn county, Iowa, prior to the happening of the matters complained of. On the twenty-third day of July, 1895, one J. W. Scott assigned to plaintiff, as trustee, a judgment rendered in his favor by a justice of the peace. Wilson, as trustee, brought suit on this judgment before a justice of the peace, and recovered a judgment thereon. The defendants in that judgment appealed to the district court. When the case came on to be heard in that court, objection was made to plaintiff’s appearing, for the reason that he had been disbarred. This objection was sustained, the court holding that plaintiff had no right to appear save in cases where he was personally a party. The court also found that Wilson had appeared as trustee in a number of cases in that court, and was demanding the right to appear for himself, or to appear as attorney for himself. Plaintiff neglected to obtain counsel, and his cause was dismissed. This proceeding is to review the aforesaid action of the court.

An insuperable objection to the proceeding is that plaintiff in his individual capacity has no interest in the proceedings save as an attorney at law, and as such he is not entitled to prosecute the action, for the reason that he has been disbarred. In the year 1853 it was held that a stranger to the record, who is noway affected by the proceedings, has no right to the writ. Davis County v. Horn, 4 G. Greene, 94. As Wilson in his individual capacity was not a party to the record before the district court, he cannot prosecute this action. Iske v. City of Newton, 54 Iowa, 586. Aside from this consideration, which we regard as conclusive, we may say that we think plaintiff’s right to appear as trustee is extremely doubtful. See Cobb v. Judge, 43 Mich. 289 (5 N. W. Rep. [585]*585309); Paul v. Purcell, 1 Browne, 348. Tbe writ is DISMISSED.

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

Deemer, C. J.

Plaintiff is an attorney at law who was disbarred from practice in the courts of this state by the district court of Linn county, Iowa, prior to the happening of the matters complained of. On the twenty-third day of July, 1895, one J. W. Scott assigned to plaintiff, as trustee, a judgment rendered in his favor by a justice of the peace. Wilson, as trustee, brought suit on this judgment before a justice of the peace, and recovered a judgment thereon. The defendants in that judgment appealed to the district court. When the case came on to be heard in that court, objection was made to plaintiff’s appearing, for the reason that he had been disbarred. This objection was sustained, the court holding that plaintiff had no right to appear save in cases where he was personally a party. The court also found that Wilson had appeared as trustee in a number of cases in that court, and was demanding the right to appear for himself, or to appear as attorney for himself. Plaintiff neglected to obtain counsel, and his cause was dismissed. This proceeding is to review the aforesaid action of the court.

An insuperable objection to the proceeding is that plaintiff in his individual capacity has no interest in the proceedings save as an attorney at law, and as such he is not entitled to prosecute the action, for the reason that he has been disbarred. In the year 1853 it was held that a stranger to the record, who is noway affected by the proceedings, has no right to the writ. Davis County v. Horn, 4 G. Greene, 94. As Wilson in his individual capacity was not a party to the record before the district court, he cannot prosecute this action. Iske v. City of Newton, 54 Iowa, 586. Aside from this consideration, which we regard as conclusive, we may say that we think plaintiff’s right to appear as trustee is extremely doubtful. See Cobb v. Judge, 43 Mich. 289 (5 N. W. Rep. [585]*585309); Paul v. Purcell, 1 Browne, 348. Tbe writ is DISMISSED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

76 N.W. 843, 106 Iowa 583, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilson-v-remley-iowa-1898.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack