Case ID: app-dc_33/html/0195-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Van Orsdel", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES EX REL. TURNER v. GARFIELD.
    This case is governed by the decision of the court in Garfield v. United States, 31 App. D. C. 332.
    No. 1926.
    Submitted March 2, 1909.
    Decided April 6, 1909.
    
      Appeal by tbe relators from a judgment of tbe Supreme Court of the District of Columbia sustaining a demurrer to and dismissing a petition for the writ of mandamus.
    
      Affirmed.
    
    
      Messrs. Kappler & Merillat and Mr. James K. J ones for the appellants.
    
      Mr. George W. Woodruff, Assistant Attorney General, Mr. Daniel W. Baher, United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, Mr. G. Edward Wright, Assistant Attorney, Interior Department, and Mr. F. W. Clements, First Assistant Attorney, Interior Department, for the appellee.
   Mr. Justice Van Orsdel

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This case, on the same facts and pleadings presented by this appeal, was considered by this court at the April term, 1908, 31 App. D. C. 332.

In the former appeal, the case came here on petition and answer, and demurrer to the answer.. On hearing in the supreme court of the District of Columbia, the demurrer was overruled, and from that ruling a special appeal was taken. We reversed the ruling and remanded- the case for further proceedings in accordance with the views expressed in our opinion. "When the mandate was filed in the court below, appellants refused to plead over, and elected to stand on their demurrer. Accordingly, a judgment was entered dismissing the action and assessing costs against the petitioner. From this judgment the present appeal is prosecuted.

We find no reason to change or modify our views as expressed in our former opinion. The judgment is therefore affirmed with costs, and it is so ordered. Affirmed.

A writ of error to the Supreme Court of the United States applied for by the appellant, was allowed May 11, 1909.