''Murdock v. City of Memphis'', 87 U.S. (20 Wall.) 590 (1875), is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court. William Tod Otto argued the case on behalf of the City of Memphis. Because the case was both argued originally and reargued before the appointment of

Chief Justice Waite Morrison Remick "Mott" Waite (November 29, 1816 – March 23, 1888) was an American attorney, jurist, and politician from Ohio. He served as the seventh chief justice of the United States from 1874 until his death in 1888. During his tenur ...

, he took no part in the judgment. Murdock challenged on several grounds a state court's decision relating to land devised by Murdock's ancestors. The city's federal claim which was outcome determinative was that a federal statute created a trust for the land. The state court accepted this claim and the Supreme Court affirmed. Murdock, however, urged the Supreme Court to review the state court's findings on state law based on the

Judiciary Act of 1867 The Habeas Corpus Act of 1867 (sess. ii, chap. 28, ) is an act of Congress that significantly expanded the jurisdiction of federal courts to issue writs of habeas corpus. Passed February 5, 1867, the Act amended the Judiciary Act of 1789 to grant t ...

. The Supreme Court interpreted the Act as not conferring jurisdiction over the state claims, but the Court did not decide as a constitutional matter whether conferring such jurisdiction would be constitutional. The Supreme Court continued to lay some ground rules for appeals of state court decisions, namely the effect of a state court decision resting on an adequate and independent state ground. While these rules were important in the development of adequate and independent state grounds doctrine in cases like ''

Fox Film Corp. v. Muller ''Fox Film Corp. v. Muller'', 296 U.S. 207 (1935), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that it cannot exert certiorari jurisdiction over a case in which there is an adequate and independent state law ground for the sta ...

'' and ''

Michigan v. Long ''Michigan v. Long'', 463 U.S. 1032 (1983), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court that extended ''Terry v. Ohio'', to allow searches of car compartments during a stop with ''reasonable suspicion''. The case also clarified and narrowed ...

'', they were merely dicta. The Court ultimately affirmed the decision of the state court on the federal law and did not decide the two issues of state law. ''Murdock v. Memphis'' is cited today as instrumental in establishing the principle that interpretation of state law is the province of the state courts, and that, in particular, the state Supreme Courts, rather than the federal courts, have final jurisdiction in this area.Erwin Chemerinsky (2014). ''The Case Against the Supreme Court.'' Penguin Books. p. 248. .

References

External links

* 1874 in United States case law United States Constitution Article Three case law United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Waite Court Adequate and independent state ground Legal history of Tennessee 1874 in Tennessee History of Memphis, Tennessee {{SCOTUS-case-stub

Further reading

References

External links