Herald E. Stringer v. United States

Appellant -Stringer moves to dismiss his appeal from an order suspending him from practicing as an attorney for 120 days made by the District Court of the Third Division of Alaska. -The court found that by Stringer’s misrepresentations he had collected fees from his client to which he- was not entitled. 124 F.Supp. 705 .

He contends that the amendment of the Alaska law respecting the discipline of attorneys, enacted after the order appealed from, requires such a dismissal because the new act is an entire substitute for the instant act and repeals it. He cites such cases as The Peggy, 1 Cranch 103, 110 , 2 L.Ed. 49 ; State of Missouri ex rel. Wabash R. Co. v. Public Service Commission, 273 U.S. 126 , 47 S.Ct. 311, 71 L.Ed. 575 and others. The appellee agrees these cases would support appellant’s contention were it not for the particular Alaska savings clause statute, hereafter considered.

It is true the amendment provides an entirely different procedure for the discipline of attorneys from that in the instant case. The law under which the order was made provides for a trial by the court where, as here, the wrongful acts were not committed in its presence. The new act, § 16,…