District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman
- Decided
- March 23, 1983
- Docket
- 81-1335
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 7,192 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that claims "inextricably intertwined” with those a state court has already decided beyond the jurisdiction of lower federal courts — In Re: The Application Of, Arnon Mozes v. Michal Mozes (2001)
- holding that district courts have no jurisdiction "to review final judgments of a state court in judicial proceedings" (emphasis added) — Narey v. Dean (1994)
- holding that final determinations of the D.C. Court of Appeals, like those of state courts, are reviewable only by the U.S. Supreme Court — JMM Corp. v. District of Columbia (2004)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Justice Brennan delivered the opinion of the Court.
We must decide in this case what authority the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit have to review decisions of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals in bar admission matters. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, reversing the United States District Court, held that the District Court had jurisdiction to review the District of Columbia Court of Appeals’ denials of the respondents’ requests for waivers of a bar admission rule that requires applicants to have graduated from an approved law school. We vacate the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and remand the case for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
M We have discussed in detail in earlier opinions the changes in the structure of the District of Columbia court system effected by the District of Columbia Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970. Pub. L. 91-358, 84 Stat. 473. See Key v. Doyle, 434 U. S. 59 (1977); Palmore v. United States, 411 U. S. 389 (1973). For purposes of this case, [*464] three provisions of that legislation are crucial. One provision made “[f]inal judgments and decrees of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals . . . reviewable by the Supreme Court of the United States in accordance with section 1257 of title 28, United States Code.” § 111, 84 Stat. 475 (codified at D. C. Code § 11-102 (1981)). Another provision amended 28 U. S. C. § 1257 to specify that the term “highest court of a State” as used in §1257 includes the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. § 172(a)(1), 84 Stat. 590. These provisions make the judgments of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, like the judgments of state courts, directly reviewable in this Court. Cases no longer have to proceed from the local courts to the United States Court of Appeals and then to this Court under 28 U. S. C. § 1254. See Key v. Doyle, supra, at 64. The third provision authorized the District of Columbia Court of Appeals to “make such rules as it deems proper respecting the examination, qualification, and admission of persons to membership in its bar, and their censure, suspension, and expulsion.” §111, 84 Stat. 521 (codified at D. C. Code § ll-2501(a) (1981)). This provision divested the United States District Court of its former authority to supervise admission to the District of Columbia Bar.
Statutes cited
Cite this
District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.