Case ID: app-dc_42/html/0383-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Chief Justice Shepard", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PRALL v. STAFFORD.
    Mandamus; Judgment; Appeal and Erbob.
    Mandamus is not the proper remedy to compel a justice of the supreme court of the District of Columbia to enter a final decree in a cause remanded thereto by this court, the appropriate remedy being by appeal.
    No. 423.
    Original. Submitted May 26, 1914.
    Decided November 2, 1914.
    Petition for a writ of mandamus to compel respondent, one of the associate justices of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, to enter a final decree in a case that had been remanded to that court.
    
      Dismissed.
    
    The facts are stated in the opinion.
    The petitioner, Mrs. Elizabeth G. Frail, appeared in person.
    There was no appearance in opposition.
   Mr. Chief Justice Shepard

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This is a petition for a writ of mandamus to Honorable .Wendell P. Stafford, one of the justices of the supreme court of the District of Columbia, to compel him to enter a final decree in a cause that has been remanded to that court.

The original cause was decided by this court May 30, 1912, Prall v. Prall, 39 App. D. C. 100.

Mandamus is not the proper remedy. The most appropriate remedy would be by appeal, in which this court could direct the proper decree to be rendered. The case having been reversed by this court and the cause remanded for the proper decree, there should be no difficulty about it.

The petition is dismissed without costs. Dismissed.