# Richardson v. McFadden

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · October 12, 1977 · 563 F.2d 1130

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8903623

## Case

- **Full name:** David RICHARDSON, Patricia King, Patrick Kelly and Hiram Spain, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. J. Means McFADDEN, Morris D. Rosen, C. W. F. Spencer, Robert D. Schumpert, David L. Freeman and Albert L. James, Jr., individually and as members of the State Board of Law Examiners, and Miss Frances Smith, Clerk of the Supreme Court of South Carolina, David RICHARDSON, Patricia King, Patrick Kelly and Hiram Spain, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. J. Means McFADDEN, Morris D. Rosen, C. W. F. Spencer, Robert D. Schumpert, David L. Freeman and Albert L. James, Jr., individually and as members of the State Board of Law Examiners, and Miss Frances Smith, Clerk of the Supreme Court of South Carolina
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** October 12, 1977
- **Citations:** 563 F.2d 1130; 15 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 7881; 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 11208
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Boreman
- **Judges:** Boreman, Hall
- **Cited by:** 30 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8903623

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- discussing the impropriety of ruling on the merits when a federal court lacks jurisdiction
- reversing decision at 540 F.2d at 744 inasmuch as this earlier opinion granted any relief

## Opinion text

BOREMAN, Senior Circuit Judge,
concurring specially in the result:
As a Senior Circuit Judge I was a member of the panel of three which considered and decided the appeal. Having served on that panel I was qualified to participate in the rehearing in banc which was ordered by the court.
Upon the rehearing in banc I have been persuaded that the jurisdictional question raised was not accorded the serious consideration by the panel to which it was entitled. From the arguments presented, in briefs and orally, and upon careful review of the opinions of other highly respected circuit courts of appeals I am convinced that the federal district court should have dismissed this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Therefore, I join HALL, J., in his opinion in which he concurs in the result and for the reasons as set forth by him therein.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8903623. Public record. Not legal advice.