Eakin v. Raub

Eakin v. Raub, 12 Sergeant & Rawle 330 (Pa. 1825), was a Pennsylvania Supreme Court case that ruled that the state supreme court had the right to review legislative acts and declare those acts as void if they contradict the state's constitution.[1] The case is most notable for the dissent of Judicial Review from Justice Gibson.[2] This adopted a similar practice to the federal concept of judicial review from the 1803 ruling of Marbury v. Madison.

Background

The Case was brought up in the court of common pleas of Northampton county Pennsylvania by James Eakin and Ann Simpson in an attempt to achieve an ejectment of Daniel Raub, Edmund Porter, Samuel Sitgreaves, Hugh Ross, John Lippens and John Ross, who owned property in Pennsylvania while residing overseas.[3]

References
  1. "Eakin v. Raub". law.jrank.org. Retrieved 8 June 2019.
  2. Champlin, Kailyn; Oldham, Cyd; Salvatoriello, Paul. "EAKIN V. RAUB". legaldictionary.net. Retrieved 8 June 2019.
  3. Eakin v. Raub, 1825 WL 1913 (1825)
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.