
    (75 South. 111)
    No. 20605.
    STATE v. WEBER.
    (April 16, 1917.)
    
      (Syllabus by Editorial Staff.)
    
    Attorney and Client <&wkey;45 — Disbarment-Jurisdiction.
    The jurisdiction of the Supx-eme Court to disbar is limited to eases of professional misconduct, and it has no power to disbar an attorney for forgery in his individual capacity, and not as a lawyer or in his professional capacity.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Attorney and Client, Cent. Dig. § 63.]
    Proceeding to disbar Dudley L. Weber.
    Suit dismissed.
    A. Y. Coco, Atty. Gen., and George H. Terriberry, of New Orleans, for the State.
   PROVOSTY, J.

This is a proceeding to disbar the defendant on the ground that he has been convicted of the crime of forgery, and is now in the state penitentiary under .sentence upon said conviction. The case stands on confirmation of default; no appearance having been made by defendant. ‘

The jurisdiction of this court for disbarment is limited to cases of professional misconduct. State v. Fourchy, 106 La. 743, 31 South. 325. In committing the forgery in question the defendant appears to have been acting for himself in his individual capacity, and in no way, shape, or form as a lawyer, or in his professional capacity. This court has therefore no jurisdiction of the case. State v. Fourchy, 106 La. 743, 31 South. 325.

The suit is therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

SOMMEKVILLE, J., takes no part.  