The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1892-09-17
SUPREME COURT OF FLoRrn.
Headnotes TO Decisions juno Tern, j.

Headnotes to Decisions juno Term.
1892.
The State Of Florida er REL Georoe p
Fowler, Relator, VS.. Jesse 7 Finley
Judge of the Fifth Judicial Circuit ~
Florida, Respondent-Manda Put
nam county.
MABRY, j.:
1. Mandamus is the appropriate remedy
upon a proper case to restore an ATTORNEY
at law to his rights as such when dis.
barred by the Judgment of a Crcuit
Court from practicing his profession. but
in such proceedings it is essential that
the alternative writ, which takes the
place of declaration at law, should show
a clear pranaG tacte case in favor of the re-
lator.
2. A demurrer to the return to an al
tentative writ will reach said writ if de-
fective, and bring it before the court for
consideration.
3 The remedy by mandamus is proper
to restore an attorney who has been dis
barred from practicing his profession, not
only where the disbarring court has ex-
ceeded its authority or proceeded irregu-
larly, but also where it has manifestly
decided enormously on the evidence and
where it is made to appear that the judg-
ment OF disbarment has been rendered by
court of competent jurisdiction it is in
cumbent upon the relatOr to allege in the
alternative writ the facts which show that
the court exceeded it's authority, pro-
ceeded irregularly, or decided enormously
on the evidence. An allegation in an al
tentative writ in such a case that the
record, evidence and proceedings in dis
barring relatOr are wholly and entirely
insufficient to authorize his disbarment,
and that such judgment is totally null
and void, is the statement of legal con-
clusion, and is insufficient in this, that il
fails 10 show any facts which render the
judgment of disbarment null and void.
4. The charges upon which proceed
ings are based to disbar an attorney
should be specific and particular so that
he may be apprised of the precise nature
ceedings are summary in their nature,
but not arbitrary or despotic, and the
court acts in the exercise of a sound dis
erection and according to law.
5. While it is competent for the appel
late court to review in proceeding by
mandamus, the evidence upon which a
NlICult dCCCt III UISUdTT1uD an at
torney, it can not determine the suffi-
cheney of the evidence to sustain such &C
ton, unless it is brought there, and where
the relator alleges as a ground for relief
the erroneous decision of the disbarring
court upon the evidence, it is essential
that he should show it, in order that the
appellate court may determine it's suffi-
cheney.
g. Where the charges against an attor-
ney in disbarment proceedings are fol
misconduct in his Office as attorney or for
acts connected with the practice of his
profession, and which show him to be an
unfit person to exercise the functions OF
an attorney in the administration of law,
although such conduct or acts may
amount to an indictable offense, the court
may proceed to disbar him without re-
gard to any previous prosecution for said
Offense. The court does not proceed in
such cases upon the theory of furnishing
the person, but to investigate the ques-
ton of protest. delinquency to deter
mine the fitness of the attorney to be en-
trusted with the conduct of causes and
the administration of public justice.
Demurrer to return sustained, with
leave to amend.
Mil}ey & Spencer. for relator.