[an error occurred while processing this directive]
U.S. Supreme Court
Ex Parte Virginia Commissioners, 112 U.S. 177 (1884)
Ex Parte Virginia Commissioners
Submitted October 27, 1884
Decided November 10, 1884
112 U.S. 177
A writ of mandamus is not ordinarily granted when the party alleging the grievance has another adequate remedy, and that remedy has not been exhausted.
This was a motion for a rule to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue. The motion showed that the petitioners in their public official capacities constituted the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund of the Virginia; that in a cause pending before the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia, a peremptory mandamus had been ordered, requiring them to give to the plaintiff in that cause or his attorney of record
"in exchange therefor dollar for dollar coupon bonds under the act of the General Assembly of the Virginia, approved February 14, 1882, commonly known as the Riddleberger Debt Law;"
that the court below certified that
"it was shown by the evidence that the matter in dispute in this cause exceeds, exclusive of costs, the value of $500, and is less than the value of $5,000;"
that the amount of the coupons so directed to be exchanged was in fact $22,716; that the said certificate was inconsistent with the judgment and must be regarded as surplusage; that the judges of the court below by an order entered of record, refused to allow the petitioners a writ of error to said judgment, and that chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanroblesvirtualawlibrary
the petitioners had a clear right to such a writ, wherefore the petitioners prayed for a rule to the judges of the court below to show cause why mandamus should not issue commanding them to allow a writ of error to said judgment, and to fix the penalty of the bond in error, and to sign a citation on said writ of error.