Opinion
November 20, 1917.
November 21, 1917
Present: RUGG, C. J., BRALEY, CROSBY, PIERCE, CARROLL, JJ.
Equity Jurisdiction, Disbarment proceedings. Attorney at Law, Disbarment proceedings.
A suit in equity, begun by a common law writ, cannot be maintained for the disbarment of an attorney at law.
BILL IN EQUITY, inserted in a common law writ dated February 9, 1917, against an attorney at law and the Bar Association of the City of Boston, praying that the defendant attorney be removed from his office and that the defendant association "show cause, if any it has," why this prayer should not be granted.
The defendant Creed inserted in his answer matter in lieu of a demurrer, averring (1) that there is no precedent nor justification for beginning a disbarment proceeding by a writ, and (2) that there is no precedent nor justification for instituting disbarment proceedings on the equity side of the court.
The defendant Bar Association of the City of Boston in its answer also demurred to the bill.
The case was heard upon the demurrers by Brown, J., who made a decree that the special matter by way of demurrer contained in the answer of the defendant Creed be sustained and that the demurrer of the Bar Association of the City of Boston also be sustained, and ordering further that the bill be dismissed. The plaintiff appealed.
E.W. Philbrick, pro se, submitted a brief.
R. Spring, for the defendant Creed. R.H. Wiswall, for the defendant Bar Association of the City of Boston.
This is a bill in equity seeking the disbarment of an attorney at law. It was begun by an ordinary writ of summons and attachment. Such a proceeding cannot be instituted or maintained in this way. Boston Bar Association v. Greenhood, 168 Mass. 169, 182. Boston Bar Association v. Casey, 211 Mass. 187; 227 Mass. 46, 51. Randall, petitioner, 11 Allen, 473. Matter of Allin, 224 Mass. 9.
Decree affirmed.