Case Brief Summary: Marbury V. Madison

In: Social Issues

Submitted By everlove
Words 1102
Pages 5
Case Brief Summary: Marbury v. Madison
Robert L. Broadwater
PAD 525
Strayer University
Dr. O’Neal
July 09, 2012

Summary of Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 1 Cranch 137, 2 L. Ed. 60 (1803).
The incumbent president Federalist John Adams was defeat in the presidential election by Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson. The day before leaving office, President John Adams named forty-two justices of the peace and sixteen new circuit court justices for the District of Columbia. This was an attempt by the Federalists to take control of the federal judiciary before Thomas Jefferson took office. The commissions were signed by President Adams and sealed by acting Secretary of State John Marshall but they were not delivered before the expiration of Adams’s term as president. Thomas Jefferson refused to honor the commissions, claiming that they were invalid because they had not been delivered by the end of Adams’s term.
William Marbury (Plaintiff) was an intended recipient of an appointment as justice of the peace. Marbury applied directly to the Supreme Court of the United States for a writ of mandamus to compel Jefferson’s Secretary of State, James Madison (Defendant), to deliver the commissions. The Judiciary Act of 1789 had granted the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus “…to any courts appointed, or persons holding office, under the authority of the United States.” Ironically, John Marshall later became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and author of the case’s opinion
1. Does Marbury have a right to the commission? 2. Does the law grant Marbury a remedy? 3. Does the Supreme Court have the authority to review acts of Congress and determine whether they are unconstitutional and therefore void? 4. Can Congress expand the scope of the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction beyond what is specified in Article…...

Similar Documents

Case Brief Stanford V. Kentucky

...I. Style of the case: Stanford v. Kentucky 492 U.S. 361, 109 S. Ct. 2969, 106 L. Ed. 2d 306 (1989). II. Statement of Facts: Kevin Stanford committed the murder of Barbel Poore in Jefferson County, Kentucky on January 7, 1981, when he was approximately 17 years and 4 months of age. Stanford and his accomplice repeatedly raped and sodomized Poore during and after their commission of a robbery at a gas station, where Stanford shot her pointblank in the face and then the back of her head. A Kentucky juvenile court conducted hearings to determine whether he should be transferred for trial as an adult under Ky. Rev. Stat Ann. § 208.170. That statute provided that juvenile court jurisdiction could be waived and an offender tried as an adult if he was either charged with a Class A felony or capital crime, or was over 16 years of age and charged with a felony. The juvenile court found certification for trial as an adult to be in the best interest of petitioner and the community. Stanford was convicted of murder, first-degree sodomy, first-degree robbery and receiving stolen property, and was sentenced to death. III. Procedural History: This case was first tried in a Kentucky juvenile court and Stanford was convicted of murder, first-degree sodomy, first-degree robbery and receiving stolen property, and was sentenced to death. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the death sentence. IV. Issues in the case: These two consolidated cases require us to decide whether the......

Words: 379 - Pages: 2

Hussein V. L.A. Fitness International, Llc – Case Brief Summary

...Hussein v. L.A. Fitness International, LLC – Case Brief Summary Christopher G. Staton Columbia Southern University Facts On February 14 2009, Sahal Hussein became a member of a fitness club at a Chicago based L.A. Fitness, which is a chain of fitness centers headquartered in Irvine, California. On July 7, 2009, Mr. Hussein was visiting the Chicago based L.A. Fitness. During his visit, while using the upper and lower bar and movable and adjustable bench on an assisted dip/chin exercise machine, he fell, striking his head and body, and as a result, is now a quadriplegic. When becoming a member at L.A. Fitness, Mr. Hussein signed a fitness service agreement and release of liability form. Mr. Hussein filed suit against L.A. Fitness in 2010. The circuit court granted L.A. Fitness’ motion to dismiss the pleading as factually insufficient and allowed Hussein to replead. L.A. Fitness is a privately owned corporation which was under no obligation by law to accept Mr. Hussein as a member. Issues 1. Is Mr. Hussein’s negligence suit regarding serious personal injuries he suffered while using exercise equipment at a fitness club barred, under Minnesota law, by an exculpatory clause in his contract with the fitness club? Holding and Rule 1. Yes. Mr. Hussein doesn’t present much of a case. The law dictates that the courts reject Mr. Hussein’s lawsuit. Hussein’s complaint was dismissed pursuant to section 2-619 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which govern the......

Words: 538 - Pages: 3

Case Brief: Orlando V. Cole

...Case Brief Orlando v. Cole (2010) FACTS Joseph M. Orlando filed a complaint for slander against fellow attorney, Garrick F. Cole. Allegedly, Orlando suffered harm to his reputation as a lawyer when Cole made false comments about his role in an investigation involving a 17-year-old student and a high school basketball coach, Thomas A. Atwater. At the time, Atwater was unrepresented and approached Orlando to admit that he had in fact sexually assaulted the high school student. He signed an affidavit and confessed to the police, while Orlando spoke to the media and gave them a copy of Atwater’s affidavit. Cole, who was now representing Atwater, told the same reporters that the affidavit was “inaccurate” and Orlando’s actions were “fraudulent” and “deceitful”. ISSUE Are the comments made by Cole reasonably susceptible of a defamatory connotation? Are Cole’s statements ones of fact, opinion, or a combination of both? RULE “A statement is defamatory in the circumstances if it discredits a person in the minds of any considerable and respectable class of the community.” “The determination whether a statement is one of fact or opinion is generally considered a question of law” because “under the First Amendment, there is no such thing as a false idea”. APPLICATION In this case, the court concluded that the comments made by Cole are susceptible of a defamatory connotation because the terms used include “inaccurate”, “fraudulent”, and “deceitful”- which all......

Words: 344 - Pages: 2

Marbury V. Madison

...Marbury v. Madison On February 24, 1803 Chief Justice John Marshall and the rest of the Supreme Court decided on the seemingly insignificant case of Marbury v. Madison. While ruling the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional, Judicial Review was established. Granting the Supreme Court the power to rule acts of the Legislative and/or Executive Branch of government unconstitutional, hence serving as a landmark case that further legitimatized the Judicial Branch as a separate, but balanced branch of government. Marbury v. Madison has been used as a very important precedent throughout our history with 165 acts of Congress deemed unconstitutional as of 2010. In the Presidential election of 1800, the Democratic-Republic party of Thomas Jefferson defeated the Federalist party of John Adams. With the loss of the election, the Federalist Party began to diminish. Although losing the presidency, John Adams and his party was still in control for a couple months. In an attempt to maintain the Federalist Parties presence, John Adams appointed a number of Judges. All of these appointees were properly commissioned, but John Adams Secretary of State failed to deliver three commissions. With one of these commissions being a man by the name of William Marbury. Thomas Jefferson began his Presidency on March 5, 1801. After learning of these Federalists appointed by John Adams, Thomas Jefferson ordered his Secretary of State, James Madison not to deliver the remaining commissions. With......

Words: 985 - Pages: 4

Case Brief: Brady V. Maryland

...Case Brief Citation: Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1962) Procedural History This case is on appeal from an affirmed decision of the Maryland Court of Appeals. It was currently on remand only for the purpose of punishment. Issue Does withholding of evidence favorable to a defendant violate that defendant’s due process rights? Under the circumstances of this case, did limitations on new proceedings as to punishment only violate defendant’s due process rights? Holding The Supreme Court held that, in general, withholding evidence favorable to the defendant as to either guilt or punishment violates a defendant’s due process rights irrespective of the intentions of prosecutors. But for the purposes of this case, no, the defendant’s due process rights were not violated when his new trial was restricted to punishment only, as the evidence in question only pertained to his relative culpability and appropriate punishment, not his underlying guilt. Facts Brady (Petitioner) and accomplice, Boblit, were both convicted in a Maryland Court of the same murder (in the first degree) but in separate trials. At trial, Brady admitted his assistance in the planning and commission of the crime, but denied having personally committed the killing. Defense counsel admitted his client’s guilt at trial, explaining to the jury that they should find him guilty but not impose the death penalty due to his lesser culpability. Brady’s attorney, prior to trial, requested access to all of the......

Words: 508 - Pages: 3

Marbury V. Madison

...The case "Marbury v. Madison began on March, 1801, when a Proponent, William Marbury, was assigned as a magistrate in the District of Columbia. William Marbury and various others were constituted to government posts made by United States Congress in the last days of President John Adams's administration; merely these eleventh hour appointments were never completely nailed down. The dissatisfied appointees raised an act of US Congress and litigated for their jobs in the Supreme Court.His right originates in an act of congress passed in February, 1801, concerning the district of Columbia. This law enacts, "that there shall be appointed in and for each of the said counties, such number of discreet persons to be justices of the peace as the president of the United States shall, from time to time, think expedient, to continue in office for five years." It appears, from the affidavits, that in compliance with this law, a commission for William Marbury as a justice of peace for the county of Washington, was signed by John Adams, then president of the United States; after which the seal of the United States was affixed to it; but the commission has never reached the person for whom it was made out. In order to determine whether he is entitled to this commission, it becomes necessary to enquire whether he has been appointed to the office. For if he has been appointed, the law continues him in office for five years, and he is entitled to the possession of those evidences of office,......

Words: 4534 - Pages: 19

Marbury Versus Madison

...| | | | Marbury versus Madison Sarah McClam MARBURY VERSUS MADISON In the weeks after John Adams lost his bid for re-election to Thomas Jefferson in 1800, the Federalist Congress increased the number of circuit courts. Adams placed Federalist judges in these new positions. One of the justices of the peace, William Marbury, filed a writ of mandamus demanding Secretary of State James Madison deliver the appointments. The Supreme Court led by John Marshall denied the request citing part of the Judiciary Act of 1789 as unconstitutional. This historic court case established the concept of Judicial Review or the ability of the Judiciary Branch to declare a law unconstitutional. This case brought the Judicial Branch of the government on a more even power basis with the Legislative and Executive Branches. The historic court case Marbury versus Madison accomplished this end thereby setting the precedent for numerous historic decisions in the future (Marbury verses Madison, 1803). On his last day in office, President John Adams named forty-two justices of the peace and sixteen new circuit court justices for the District of Columbia under the Organic Act. The Organic Act was an attempt by the Federalists to take control of the federal judiciary before Thomas Jefferson took office. The commissions were signed by President Adams and sealed by acting Secretary of State John Marshall (who later became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and author of this opinion), but they were...

Words: 3750 - Pages: 15

Helling V. Casey Case Brief

...Title: Helling v. Carey 83 Wash. 2d 514, 519 P.2d 981 (1974) Procedure: The plaintiff Helling, a patient, appealed from a judgment of the Court of Appeals (state of Washington) affirming the judgment of the trial court for defendant ophthalmologists in a medical malpractice action involving the ophthalmologists' failure to timely administer a glaucoma test. This case was heard in the Supreme Court in Washington state. Issue or issues: The issue was whether the ophthalmologists' compliance with the standard of the profession of ophthalmology, that did not require the giving of a routine pressure test to persons under 40 years of age, insulated them from liability. Facts: The patient, who was 32 years of age when she was diagnosed with glaucoma, sued the ophthalmologists, alleging that she suffered severe and permanent damage to her eyes as the proximate result of the ophthalmologists' negligence in failing timely administer a pressure test for glaucoma. Both the trial and appellate courts ruled in favor of the ophthalmologists. Holding: The Washington Supreme Court held, as a matter of law, that the reasonable standard that should have been followed under the undisputed facts of this case was the timely giving of this simple, harmless pressure test to this plaintiff and that, in failing to do so, the defendants were negligent, which proximately resulted in the blindness sustained by the plaintiff for which the defendants are liable. Analysis: After years of......

Words: 535 - Pages: 3

Case Brief Levi. V. Abercrombie

...Levi Strauss & Co. V. Abercrombie & Fitch Trading Co. 633 F.3d 1158 (2011) FACTS: Levi Strauss has stitched a design on the back pockets of its jeans since 1873. Levi Strauss holds multiple federally registered trademarks on this bow-shaped design, an “Arcuate”. They are required to actively monitor competing designs and enforce its trademark rights. In 2005, Abercrombie & Fitch attempted to register a “mirror” image stitching design for use on certain products. Levi Strauss argued that this design should be barred because it could potentially cause confusion with and dilute the Levi Strauss Arcuate mark. While the ninth circuit appeal was pending, Abercrombie announced the shutdown of the Ruehl brand and the Ruehl retail stores. Abercrombie then proceeded to file a new trademark-registration application with the PTO. This time they were attempting to register the same mirror image with a different brand name, Gilley Hicks. These would be sold at different prices, and through different channels than their former Ruehl line. After this, Levi Strauss attempted to have Abercrombie agree to amend the pleadings to add Gilley Hicks, or say that any injunction occurred would extend to include the Gilley Hicks line as well; Abercrombie refused. PROCEDURAL HISTORY: On July 20, 2007, Levi Strauss sued Abercrombie in the Northern District of California after learning that Abercrombie was selling products with this mirror image on a line of jeans- the “Ruehl”. The district court held......

Words: 610 - Pages: 3

Marbury vs. Madison

...Marbury vs. Madison was a case heard by the Supreme Court that greatly verified the need for accountability of governmental power through checks and balances….. specifically that of judicial review. Starting with the key players in this case, Marbury was a man who was to be appointed as the Justice of the Peace for Washington County in the District of Columbia by President Adams. Madison was the new Secretary of State appointed during Jefferson’s term who withheld Marbury’s (as well as others) petition for commission when Jefferson assumed office, as requested by the president. Marshall was the Chief of Justice, previously Adams Secretary of state. He made and wrote the decision to overturn the act of congress that wrote the principle of judicial review and thusly made the decision against giving Marbury his commission. As for the story. Both the first and second president were federalists. During Adams term, he created new positions for judgeships within the executive branch then in an attempt to keep the federalist influence he appointed loyal federalists to these positions days before the third president took office. Jefferson was a democratic republican. The catch was that though these positions were appointed to specific people and approved by senate, the letters were not delivered to the appointed judges and thusly unofficial. Jefferson was frustrated by this “packing” of the judiciary (pg 63) and ordered that the letters not delivered after his inauguration be voided,......

Words: 795 - Pages: 4

Marbury Case Brief

...Marbury v Madison, 5 U.S. 137, (1803) 5 U.S. 137 (Cranch) Facts The Judiciary Act of 1801 gave the President the authority to appoint Federal Judges. During the interim period when President Adams term was coming to close and President-elect Jefferson’s term was set to begin, President Adams appointed several federal Judges, including William Marbury. The commissions were signed and sealed by Acting Secretary of State, John Marshal, but were not delivered prior to the end of the expiration of President Adams term. William Marbury motioned that the Supreme Court compel the new Secretary of State, James Madison, to deliver the commission. Issues At issue are the questions does William Marbury have the right to the commission and if so, are there laws granting Marbury a remedy. Additionally, Marbury is requesting intervention from the Supreme Court which brings to question whether Supreme Court has the authority to review and determine acts of congress, including acts that are void due to them being unconstitutional. Lastly, does congress have the authority to enlarge the scope of Supreme Court’s jurisdiction further than that discussed in Article III of the constitution and does Supreme Court maintain exclusive jurisdiction with regard to writs of mandamus. Law 1) William Marbury had right to the commission as the grant of commission to him took effect when it was signed by President Adams. 2) There are laws granting Marbury a remedy. The government is responsible for......

Words: 307 - Pages: 2

Marbury V. Madison

...Marbury v. Madison The power that the Supreme Court has to determine the constitutionality and the validity of the acts of the executive and legislative branches of government is a firmly established basic element of the United States system of government. In 1803, Chief Justice John Marshall’s opinion in the case of Marbury v. Madison resulted in a landmark decision in the history of the Supreme Court. (Kramer, 2000) The court’s ruling established the power of judicial review, declared that the Constitution was the supreme law of the land, and that the Supreme Court has the final authority on interpreting the Constitution. In the Election of 1801, Thomas Jefferson and his anti-federalist Republican Party defeated then President John Adams and the Federalist Party. The Republicans also won a majority in Congress. In an effort to keep at least one branch of the government under Federalist control before the Republicans took office, the Federalist controlled Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1801 in a lame-duck session (Marbury V. Madison, n.d.). The bill reformed a 1789 statute and created many new judgeships. Adams nominated judges and the Senate confirmed them. Adams then stayed up until long after midnight on March 3, 1801, his last full day in office, signing commissions that put fifty-nine loyal Federalists in office. These were the so-called "midnight judges." (Kramer, 2000) In the final weeks before Jefferson took office, John Marshall was Secretary of State......

Words: 776 - Pages: 4

Marbury and Madison

...Case Brief: Constitutional Law Name of case and date: Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 1 Cranch 137, 2 L. Ed. 60 (1803). Parties: Appellant – William Marbury; Appellee – James Madison Procedural history: The case went directly to the Supreme Court Facts: William Marbury was one of the 42 people who President John Adams named as justices of the peace on the last night of his presidency. Marbury included all of the documentation that he needed to be appointed as a justice of the peace. However, Secretary of state John Marshall failed to give Marbury his commission. After Jefferson took office, he ordered his Secretary of State, James Madison, to not deliver the commission. With the power of the Judiciary act of 1789, Marbury decided to sue, asking the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus in order for Madison to deliver the commission. Issue: 1. Does the applicant have the right to commission, as he demands? 2. If he has a right, and that right has been violated, do the laws of his country afford him a remedy? 3. If they do afford him a remedy, is it a mandamus issuing from this court. Holding: 1.Yes, Marbury has the right to the commission 2. Yes, the law grants Marbury a remedy. 3. No, the Supreme Court cannot issue a mandamus because the grant of power is unconstitutional. Rule of law: Article III of the U.S. Constitution: Has the power to regulate appellate jurisdiction but not original jurisdiction Reasoning: 1) Marbury has the right......

Words: 409 - Pages: 2

Marbury vs. Madison

...October 30, 2011 Marbury vs. Madison It is not difficult to explain how important John Marshall's decision in the case Marbury vs. Madison was and how our entire Supreme Court and country's politics would be different if he had not made the decision. John Marshall's decision to declare that the Supreme Court could not give out writs of mandamus and thus the Judiciary Act of 1789 (that gave out this power) was unconstitutional set the precedent for the Supreme Court to have the power to declare a law unconstitutional with the principle of judicial review. With this decision, he gave the Judiciary Branch as much power as the other two branches, and also stressed the power of the national government over the states. Without this decision, the states could be the final authority in determining if laws are unconstitutional and federalism would have been minimized. The states would not respect the decisions of the federal government. In this case, William Marbury, a Federalist and a “midnight appointment” of President John Adams, did not receive his commission from the new Secretary of State under Thomas Jefferson, James Madison. Marbury asked the Supreme Court to issue a “writ of mandamus” forcing Madison to deliver his commission. Marshall dismissed suit, but in doing so struck down part of Judiciary Act of 1789 because the Supreme Court had no authority to give Marbury his commission. This was significant because it established the precedent of “judicial review” and......

Words: 530 - Pages: 3

Marbury V Masdison

...administration came in President Jefferson told his Secretary of State, James Madison, not to deliver the remaining 17 commissions. Ten months later William Marbury who had been appointed Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia took his case to the Supreme Court. The Jefferson dominated congress passed a law canceling the next session of the Supreme Court. When the court finally convened 14 months later the first case it took up was Marbury v. Madison. Marshall, being an astute lawyer, realized this was an important case for the nascent court to consider. He knew if he refused to take the case the court would look weak, but if he took it and ruled in favor of Marbury he also knew that the Jefferson administration would simply ignore the court’s order in which case the court would likewise appear weak and ineffectual. So what to do. Marshall formulated a strategy to strengthen the court at a time when it was very much the weakest and least respected part of government relative to the legislative and executive branches. His solution defined the genius of John Marshall and set the Supreme Court on the path to becoming an equal to the legislative and executive branches. In the court’s long and detailed decision Marshall scolded the Jefferson administration by writing that Marbury had been treated very badly by having his commission illegally withheld and he should be given it now. It looked like Marbury had won and the Jefferson administration had lost. But wait;......

Words: 836 - Pages: 4