Pennsylvania High Court of Errors and Appeals

Last updated

Pennsylvania High Court of Errors and Appeals
Pennsylvania state coat of arms (illustrated, 1876).jpg
Established1780 (1780)
Location Philadelphia
Authorized bystatute of Pennsylvania General Assembly

The Pennsylvania High Court of Errors and Appeals was a public tribunal existing from 1780 to 1808; it was the court of last resort in the Commonwealth. The Pennsylvania General Assembly created it during the American Revolution to take the place of the British Appeals Committee of the Privy Council. The High Court heard cases from the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania and other lower state courts. Eventually the General Assembly voted to abolish the High Court, effective in 1808, and transfer its powers to the state supreme court.

Contents

Establishment

[I]t is requisite that the good people of this commonwealth, who have adopted the common law of England, should enjoy the full benefit thereof by the erection of a competent jurisdiction within this state for the hearing, determining and judging in the last instance upon complaints of error at common law; and also . . . of the court of admiralty . . . and likewise . . . of the several registers of wills and for granting administrations.

An Act for Erecting an [sic] High Court of Errors and Appeals (1780)

Royal arms of the Privy Council Royal Arms of the United Kingdom (Privy Council).svg
Royal arms of the Privy Council
Thomas McKean Thomas McKean by Charles Willson Peale, 1797.jpg
Thomas McKean

Until the Declaration of Independence in 1776, the ultimate tribunal for the American colonies was the Privy Council in London. Then as now, a committee of the Privy Council heard cases from certain overseas jurisdictions under the rule of the British crown. [1] One legal effect of American Independence, however, was permanently ending the flow of cases to London from the newly-independent United States. A judicial void was left by the disappearance of the Privy Council as the final tribunal for the Commonwealth.

Courtroom of the High Court in Independence Hall, Philadelphia Independence Hall 6.jpg
Courtroom of the High Court in Independence Hall, Philadelphia

An Act in 1780 established the High Court of Errors and Appeals. [2] The High Court's jurisdiction encompassed cases brought up from Pennsylvania's supreme court, register's courts, and state admiralty court. The establishing statute recited, "the good people of this commonwealth, by their happy deliverance from their late dependent condition [on Britain], and by becoming free and sovereign are released from this badge of slavery and have acquired the transcendent benefit of having justice administered to them at home and at moderate cost and charges." [2] The 1780 Act permitted parties whose cases to the Privy Council had not been adjudicated by July 4, 1776−the date of American Independence−to refile their cases in the new High Court. [2] [3]

Name of the court

The High Court was called a court of "Errors and Appeals", and not a court "of Appeals" because in the English judicial process there was a difference between a proceeding in error and an appeal. [4] "A writ of error ordered judges to send the record of their proceedings in a particular case to a superior court for inspection. ... The court of error could concern itself only with 'manifest error' revealed by the written words (as where an essential procedural step was missing), or with new facts[.]" [4] The other party in the case would hear the alleged errors and could dispute them. After argument by the attorneys for each party, the court of errors could affirm or reverse the judgment of the lower court. [4] In contrast, an appeal allowed a higher court to look "behind the record" of the written words and determine, for example, if the lower court had made a mistake in law in the case. [4]

Courtrooms

Despite the difficulties of travel for almost 300 miles and across the Allegheny Mountains from the western part of Pennsylvania, the 1780 Act directed that the High Court was to sit only in Philadelphia, in the far southeastern corner of the Commonwealth. [2] In Philadelphia the High Court met in the Pennsylvania State House (now Independence Hall), in the courtroom usually used by the state supreme court, directly across the vestibule from the Assembly Room in which both the Declaration of Independence and United States Constitution were debated and signed. In 1804, however, the High Court's sessions moved to the Philadelphia County Courthouse (now called Congress Hall), where it met until the court's dissolution in 1808. [5]

Judges

John Dickinson John Dickinson portrait.jpg
John Dickinson
Benjamin Chew BENJAMIN CHEW PORTRAIT 1.jpg
Benjamin Chew
Francis Hopkinson Francis Hopkinson, 1785 - Robert Edge Pine.jpg
Francis Hopkinson
Judge William Bradford, Jr. William Bradford, AG.jpg
Judge William Bradford, Jr.
Edward Shippen IV Edward Shippen IV Robert Feke.jpg
Edward Shippen IV
William Tilghman Chief Justice William Tilghman Rembrandt Peale.jpg
William Tilghman

When first set up, the judges of the High Court comprised the president of the Supreme Executive Council, the judges of the supreme court, the judge of the Pennsylvania admiralty court, and "three persons of known integrity and ability". Until its 1791 reorganization, the High Court's members included both non-lawyers such as Benjamin Franklin, and noted lawyers as Joseph Reed, and John Dickinson. Some of the existing judges were reappointed after the General Assembly reorganized the High Court in 1791.

Judges of the High Court of Errors and Appeals, 1780–1808

JudgeBegan term(s) of office
Benjamin Franklin 1785
John Dickinson 1782
Joseph Reed 1780
William Moore 1781
Thomas Mifflin 1788
Thomas McKean 1780, 1791
Edward Shippen IV 1784, 1791
William Tilghman 1805
James Riddle 1794
Benjamin Chew 1791
Jasper Yeates 1791
Thomas Smith 1794
James Biddle 1791
William Augustus Atlee 1780, 1791
John Evans1780
George Bryan 1780
William Bradford Jr. 1791
Hugh Henry Brackenridge 1799
Jacob Rush 1784, 1791
Thomas Cooper 1804
Samuel Miles 1783
Henry Wynkoop 1790
James Smith 1780
Francis Hopkinson 1780
James Bayard1783
Alexander Addison 1791
John D. Coxe 1797
John Joseph Henry 1793

Reorganization and abolition

After Pennsylvania's Constitution of 1790 became effective, the Supreme Executive Council was replaced by a single Governor of Pennsylvania, and the judicial, legislative, and executive powers were separated for the first time in the Commonwealth. The General Assembly necessarily needed to change the composition of the High Court to comply with the new constitution's prescribed separation of powers. Under a 1791 Act, the High Court's bench was redefined as comprising the judges of the supreme court, the presidents of the various courts of common pleas throughout the Commonwealth, and three other persons of known legal ability. [6] In addition, since the federal courts had taken on exclusive admiralty jurisdiction after the United States Constitution came into force in 1789, there was no more Pennsylvania Admiralty Court, and so no state admiralty cases for the High Court to hear, and no admiralty judge to sit on the High Court's bench.

Dallas's report of Talbot v. Commanders of Three Brigs, a 1784 decision of the High Court United States Reports, Volume 1, page 103, Talbot v. Commanders of Three Brigs case report.jpg
Dallas's report of Talbot v. Commanders of Three Brigs, a 1784 decision of the High Court
Alexander Dallas Alexander J. Dallas.jpg
Alexander Dallas

By 1806 the General Assembly determined there was no further need for a judicial layer above the state supreme court (in its entire existence only thirty-three cases had been argued before the High Court); [7] it abolished the High Court of Errors and Appeals and transferred its jurisdiction over appeals and errors to the state supreme court, to be effective in 1808 so that the High Court would have two additional terms to dispose of pending cases before dissolving. [8] [9] The terminal hearing of the High Court was on July 10, 1808. [5]

Case reports

Not all cases in the High Court resulted in an opinion and not all of its opinions have been published.

United States Reports

Alexander Dallas, a lawyer in Philadelphia who later served as U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, began publishing a series of case reports in what became the United States Reports . The decisions appearing in the early United States Reports are not decisions only of the United States Supreme Court as they were in subsequent volumes. Instead, they include decisions from various Pennsylvania courts. Dallas published a total of four volumes of decisions, and selected cases of the Pennsylvania High Court of Errors and Appeals appear in the first, second, and fourth of Dallas's volumes.

Other reporters

Other cases from the High Court (some only mentioned in short notes) are scattered throughout Pennsylvania case compilations by Alexander Addison (Addison's Reports (Add.)), Jasper Yeates (Yeates's Reports (Yeates)), Horace Binney (Binney's Reports (Binn.)), and Peter A. Browne (Browne's Reports).

Partial list of cases in the High Court of Errors and Appeals, 1780–1808

CaseCitationCommentsLink to Opinion or Volume
Montgomery v. Henry1 U.S. (1 Dall.) 49 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1780)full opinion
Talbot v. Commanders of Three Brigs 1 U.S. (1 Dall.) 95 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1784)full opinion
Lawson v. Morrison2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 286 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1792)full opinion
Hannum v. Spear2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 291 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1795)full opinion
Ludlow v. Bingham4 U.S. (4 Dall.) 41 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1799)full opinion
Burd v. Smith4 U.S. (4 Dall.) 66 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1802)full opinion
Lea v. Yard4 U.S. (4 Dall.) 82 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1804)full opinion
Purviance v. Angus1 U.S. (1 Dall.) 180 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1786)full opinion
Lewis v. Maris1 U.S. (1 Dall.) 278 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1788)full opinion
Kirkbridge v. Durden1 U.S. (1 Dall.) 288 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1788)full opinion
Lacaze v. Pennsylvania ex rel. Lanoix1 Add. 59 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1793)full opinion
M'Pherson v. M'Pherson1 Add. 327 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1797)full opinion
Skinner v. Robison1 Browne 358 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1804)note only [10]
Palmer v. Sparkes4 Yeates 385 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1801)note only [11]
Hill v. West4 Yeates 385 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1807)case report on remand to supreme court [11]
Stiles v. Girard4 Yeates 1 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 17??)note only [11]
Vasse v. Ball2 Yeates 185 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1797)note only [12]
Johnson v. Haine's Lessee4 U.S. (4 Dall.) 55 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1799)full opinion
Spear v. Hannum1 Yeates 388 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1795)note only [13]
Furry v. Stone1 Yeates 187 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1792)note only [13]
Fitzgerald v. Caldwell2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 215 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1793)full opinion at end of supreme court's opinion
Hill's Lessee v. West1 Binn. 488 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1808)note only [14]
Dempsey v. Insurance Co.1 Binn. 299 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1808)note only [14]
Hassanclever v. Tucker2 Binn. 525 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1803)full opinion
Hauer's Lessee v. Sheetz2 Binn. 532 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1807)full opinion
Insurance Co. v. Jones2 Binn. 547 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1807)full opinion
Ewing v. Houston4 U.S. (4 Dall.) 58 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1799)full opinion
Livezey v. Gorgas4 U.S. (4 Dall.) 61 (Pa. Ct. Err. & App. 1799)full opinion

Records

Records of the High Court are held at the Pennsylvania State Archives in the capital city, Harrisburg. [15] These records are:

Minutes and writs of the High Court of Errors and Appeals

A record of the proceedings of the High Court of Errors and Appeals between April 6, 1780 and July 2, 1808. Data includes date of session, names of plaintiff (appellant), defendant (appellee), their attorneys, court members present; listings of writs of error and docketed cases, the courts or counties from which the appeal was made, and a listing of cases argued, adjudged and subsequent orders by the court. (Series #33.128)

Mittimus papers

Mittimus [16] papers covering the years 1783–1785, 1788, 1792–1793, 1795, 1798–1799, 1801, and 1804. These include writs affirming the judgments of the Supreme Court as decided by the High Court of Errors and Appeals, and remitting the case back to the Supreme Court for execution of judgment. Information has names of appellant and appellee; nature of the case; High Court of Errors and Appeals judgment; date writ was returned to the Supreme Court. (Series #33.129)

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judicial Committee of the Privy Council</span> Judicial body in the United Kingdom

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) is the highest court of appeal for the Crown Dependencies, the British Overseas Territories, some Commonwealth countries and a few institutions in the United Kingdom. Established on 14 August 1833 to hear appeals formerly heard by the King-in-Council, the Privy Council formerly acted as the court of last resort for the entire British Empire, other than for the United Kingdom itself.

In the United States, a state supreme court is the highest court in the state judiciary of a U.S. state. On matters of state law, the judgment of a state supreme court is considered final and binding in both state and federal courts.

In law, certiorari is a court process to seek judicial review of a decision of a lower court or government agency. Certiorari comes from the name of an English prerogative writ, issued by a superior court to direct that the record of the lower court be sent to the superior court for review. The term is Latin for "to be made certain", and comes from the opening line of such writs, which traditionally began with the Latin words "Certiorari volumus...".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Pennsylvania</span> Highest court in the U.S. state of Pennsylvania

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is the highest court in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's Unified Judicial System. It also claims to be the oldest appellate court in the United States, a claim that is disputed by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania began in 1684 as the Provincial Court, and casual references to it as the "Supreme Court" of Pennsylvania were made official in 1722 upon its reorganization as an entity separate from the control of the royal governor.

<i>R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers Society of Australia</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers' Society of Australia, known as the Boilermakers' Case, was a 1956 decision of the High Court of Australia which considered the powers of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration to punish the Boilermakers' Society of Australia, a union which had disobeyed the orders of that court in relation to an industrial dispute between boilermakers and their employer body, the Metal Trades Employers' Association.

The judiciary of Australia comprises judges who sit in federal courts and courts of the States and Territories of Australia. The High Court of Australia sits at the apex of the Australian court hierarchy as the ultimate court of appeal on matters of both federal and State law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Tasmania</span> Tasmanian judiciary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania is the highest State court in the Australian State of Tasmania. In the Australian court hierarchy, the Supreme Court of Tasmania is in the middle level, with both an appellate jurisdiction over lower courts, and decisions made by Court to be heard on appeal by the High Court of Australia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Nepal</span> Highest court in Nepal

The Supreme Court of Nepal is the highest court in Nepal. It has appellate jurisdiction over decisions of the seven High Courts and extraordinary original jurisdiction. The court consists of twenty Justices and one Chief Justice.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Court of Appeal of Newfoundland and Labrador</span>

The Court of Appeal of Newfoundland and Labrador is at the top of the hierarchy of courts for the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The Court of Appeal derives its powers and jurisdiction from the Court of Appeal Act.

The Judiciary Act of 1925, also known as the Judge's Bill or Certiorari Act, was an act of the United States Congress that sought to reduce the workload of the Supreme Court of the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Court of Appeal of Singapore</span> Supreme appellate court of Singapore

The Court of Appeal of Singapore is the highest court in the judicial system of Singapore. It is the upper division of the Supreme Court of Singapore, the lower being the High Court. The Court of Appeal consists of the chief justice, who is the president of the Court, and the judges of the Court of Appeal. The chief justice may ask judges of the High Court to sit as members of the Court of Appeal to hear particular cases. The seat of the Court of Appeal is the Supreme Court Building.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme court</span> Highest court in a jurisdiction

In most legal jurisdictions, a supreme court, also known as a court of last resort, apex court, and highcourt of appeal, is the highest court within the hierarchy of courts. Broadly speaking, the decisions of a supreme court are not subject to further review by any other court. Supreme courts typically function primarily as appellate courts, hearing appeals from decisions of lower trial courts, or from intermediate-level appellate courts.

<i>United States Reports</i>, volume 1

This is a list of cases reported in volume 1 of United States Reports, decided by various Pennsylvania courts from 1754 to 1789.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Reports, volume 2</span>

This is a list of cases reported in volume 2 U.S. of United States Reports, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States from 1791 to 1793. Case reports from other federal and state tribunals also appear in 2 U.S..

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Reports, volume 4</span>

This is a list of cases reported in volume 4 U.S. of United States Reports, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1799 and 1800. Case reports from other tribunals also appear in 4 U.S..

West v. Barnes, 2 U.S. 401 (1791), was the first United States Supreme Court decision and the earliest case calling for oral argument. Van Staphorst v. Maryland (1791) was docketed prior to West v. Barnes but settled before the Court heard the case: West was argued on August 2 and decided on August 3, 1791. Collet v. Collet (1792) was the first appellate case docketed with the Court but was dropped before it could be heard. Supreme Court Reporter Alexander Dallas did not publish the justices' full opinions in West v. Barnes, which were published in various newspapers around the country at the time, but he published an abbreviated summary of the decision.

Courts of Pennsylvania include:

United States v. More, 7 U.S. 159 (1805), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that it had no jurisdiction to hear appeals from criminal cases in the circuit courts by writs of error. Relying on the Exceptions Clause, More held that Congress's enumerated grants of appellate jurisdiction to the Court operated as an exercise of Congress's power to eliminate all other forms of appellate jurisdiction.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Mauritius</span> The Mauritius Supreme Court formed 1850

The Supreme Court of Mauritius is the highest court of Mauritius and is the final court of appeal in the Mauritian judicial system. It was established in its current form in 1850, replacing the Cour d'Appel established in 1808 during the French administration and has a permanent seat in Port Louis. There is a right of appeal from the Supreme Court of Mauritius directly to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) is the court of final appeal for Mauritius.

References

  1. "The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council". www.jcpc.uk. Retrieved March 24, 2021.
  2. 1 2 3 4 An Act for Erecting an [sic] High Court of Errors and Appeals . Retrieved March 25, 2021 via babel.hathitrust.org.
  3. Scherer, Bernard (January 1994). "B.F. Scherer, The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania and the Origins of King's Bench Power, 32 Duquesne L. Rev. 525, 529 (1994)". Duquesne Law Review. 32 (3): 525. Retrieved March 20, 2021.
  4. 1 2 3 4 Baker, Sir John. An Introduction to English Legal History Fifth Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2019), p. 146.
  5. 1 2 Konkle, Burton Alva. Benjamin Chew, 1722-1810. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press (1932), pp. 218, 278, 284.
  6. An Act to Establish the Judicial Courts of the Commonwealth in Conformity to the Alterations and Amendments in the Constitution . Retrieved March 25, 2021 via babel.hathitrust.org.
  7. "6 American L. Register 238, 248 (1858)". jstor.org. JSTOR   3301774 . Retrieved March 26, 2021.
  8. An Act to Alter the Judiciary System of this Commonwealth. Laws, etc. (Compiled statutes : 1700-1825). Retrieved March 25, 2021 via babel.hathitrust.org.
  9. Loyd, William H. The Early Courts of Pennsylvania. Boston: The Boston Book Company (1910), p. 136.
  10. Browne, Peter A. Reports of cases adjudged in the Court of common pleas of the first judicial district of Pennsylvania [1801-1814], Volume 1 . Retrieved March 25, 2021 via hathitrust.org.
  11. 1 2 3 Yeates, Jasper (1871). Reports of cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania with some select cases at nisi prius, and in the Circuit courts [1791-1808], Volume 4. Yeates reports. Retrieved March 25, 2021 via hathitrust.org.
  12. Yeates, Jasper (1871). Reports of cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania with some select cases at nisi prius, and in the Circuit courts [1791-1808], Volume 2. Yeates reports. Retrieved March 25, 2021 via hathitrust.org.
  13. 1 2 Yeates, Jasper (1871). Reports of cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania with some select cases at nisi prius, and in the Circuit courts [1791-1808], Volume 1. Yeates reports. Retrieved March 25, 2021 via hathitrust.org.
  14. 1 2 Binney, Horace. Reports of cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Volume 1. Binney's reports. William P. Farrand and Co. Retrieved March 25, 2021.
  15. "General Index to Women's Resources at the PA State Archives". phmc.pa.gov/Archives. Retrieved March 25, 2021.
  16. In this context, a "mittimus" is a writ for moving papers from one court to another, e.g., from the High Court to the lower court from which the appeal originated. See Wiktionary, second definition under "Noun":