In Re Shoop
Philippine Islands Supreme Court
41 Phil. 213 (1920)
- Written by Curtis Parvin, JD
Facts
Max Shoop (plaintiff), a New York lawyer, sought admission to the bar in the Philippines. The Philippines allowed reciprocal rights to admission provided comity was established with the foreign jurisdiction (i.e., the foreign jurisdiction permitted Philippine-based lawyers to practice in that jurisdiction on similar terms). The New York admission statute allowed for reciprocal admissions if the applicant’s jurisdiction followed jurisprudence based on English common-law principles. Philippine law had a basis in indigenous customs, Spanish codified civil law for more than three centuries of Spanish colonial rule, and American common law. Previously, New York had accepted a Filipino lawyer for admission and rejected another. [Editor’s Note: Starting in 1565, the Philippines were subject to Spanish colonial rule. Spain ceded the Philippines to the United States in 1898 following the Spanish-American War. The Philippines sought to develop an independent state, but the United States maintained control until 1946. The court ignored consideration of Islamic law despite the Philippines’ significant Muslim population.]
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Malcolm, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
