|
|
Alejandrino v. Quezon, 271 U.S. 528 (1926)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Alejandrino v. Quezon, 271 U.S. 528 (1926)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 271 U.S. 500, click here.
Alejandrino v. Quezon No. 309 Submitted May 4, 1926 Decided June 7, 1926 271 U.S. 528
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS
Syllabus
1. The Jurisdictional Act of September 6, 1916, repealed the provision of the Philippine Autonomy Act giving this Court jurisdiction to review by writ of error the final judgments of the Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands in cases involving the Constitution, or any statute, treaty, title, or privilege of the United States or where the value in controversy exceeds $25,000, and substituted a review of such judgments by certiorari. P. 529.
2. The questions whether a member of the Philippine Senate appointed by the Governor General under the Autonomy Act could be suspended by the elected members, and whether, if their action were invalid, the Supreme Court of the Islands, in this suit against those members, had jurisdiction to require them, by mandamus or injunction, to readmit him as an active member became moot in this case, owing to the expiration of the period of suspension, and no other question being involved save the incidental one of the petitioner’s right to recover unpaid salary during the period of suspension, and that being an issue concerning which the present petition fails to furnish sufficient information to enable the court, in any event, to afford a remedy, and one, furthermore, which would properly be tried in a separate proceeding against some executive officer or officers charged with the ministerial duty of paying such salary, the cause as a whole must be treated as moot, and, following the established practice of this Court, the judgment below, dismissing the petition for want of jurisdiction is vacated, and the cause remanded with directions to dismiss the petition, without costs. P. 532.
Certiorari to a judgment of the Supreme Court of the Philippines dismissing, for want of jurisdiction, an original proceeding, for injunction and mandamus brought by an appointed member of the Senate of the Islands, against its twenty-two elected members, including its President, and its Secretary, its Sergeant at Arms, and its Paymaster, in which the petitioner challenged the validity of a resolution of the Senate suspending him from the prerogatives, privileges, and emoluments of his office during one year from January 1st, 1924, and sought to have it set aside and recognition of his rights as Senator enforced. The judgment below was entered on September 22, 1924.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Alejandrino v. Quezon, 271 U.S. 528 (1926) in 271 U.S. 528 271 U.S. 529. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=BKB3MCJXXBYQML1.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Alejandrino v. Quezon, 271 U.S. 528 (1926), in 271 U.S. 528, page 271 U.S. 529. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=BKB3MCJXXBYQML1.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Alejandrino v. Quezon, 271 U.S. 528 (1926). cited in 1926, 271 U.S. 528, pp.271 U.S. 529. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=BKB3MCJXXBYQML1.
|