Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Martin v. United States, reviving a lawsuit born of an FBI mistaken assault on the wrong house. The opinion concerns interpretations of the Federal Tort Claims Act and the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause. But the Court also discusses in some detail the history behind In re Neagle (1890) 135 U. S. 1, a case and its progeny on which the Court of Appeals had relied in an analysis the high court rejects.
The Martin holding is not of particular interest for a California Supreme Court blog, but the backstory related in the opinion certainly is, as it concerns two former justices of the state court.
Here’s the opinion’s relevant portion (relevant, that is, to this blog):
In re Neagle involved an affair, a homicide, and a habeas petition. In 1883, Sarah Althea Hill claimed to be the wife of U. S. Senator William Sharon and sought a share of his fortune in acrimonious California divorce proceedings. Sharon admitted an affair but insisted that Hill had forged the pair’s handwritten marriage contract. Hill hired David Terry to represent her. A former Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court, Terry had resigned that post after killing (another) U. S. Senator in a duel. As the litigation wore on, lawyer and client married.
Eventually, the dispute between Hill and Sharon wound up before U. S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Field while he was riding circuit. Terry and Justice Field were no strangers, having served together on the California Supreme Court. Even so, Justice Field issued a devastating ruling against Hill. As he announced his decision, Hill leapt from her seat, denounced the Justice as “bought,” and had to be carried from the courtroom. Joining the fracas, Terry punched a marshal and brandished a bowie knife. Even after the couple spent time in jail for contempt, they continued to issue threats against Justice Field.
Those events found their way into the U. S. Reports this way. Aware of the threat Hill and Terry posed, the U. S. Attorney General ordered Deputy Marshal David Neagle, a former chief of police in Tombstone, Arizona, to accompany Justice Field when he next rode circuit in California. That decision proved prescient, for Terry soon cornered the Justice on a train and attacked him. Intervening to protect the Justice, Neagle shot and killed Terry. After the shooting, California authorities arrested Neagle and began prosecuting him for murder. Neagle countered by filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal court seeking his release.
(Citations and a footnote omitted.)
As the Martin opinion explains, the Court in Neagle held that “the Supremacy Clause shielded [the deputy marshal] from state criminal charges.” It then concludes, “Memorable as In re Neagle may be, we do not see how it informs the prosaic task of applying the FTCA.”
Related:
