The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-11-13
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
WAsmScToy Nov 10 1878


Argument has been heard in the United States su-
prcmc Court on the following cases.
No. S. Daineso vs. Board OF Public Works of the
District OF Columbia Appeal from the Supreme Court
OF the District OF Columbia; and
No. 80. Same VS.. Same ct al.-These actions were
brought by Dancse TO restrain the Board
stroyng block OF frame buildings he had in OF
erection on street. in Washington and the other by
the Board to restrain Danese from further proceeding
with the work. on the ground that their plan OF
structure and materials were unsafe Danese's bill
dismissed and the injunction obtained by the
Board was made perpetual the Court holding that the
Board had the power to control the character OF all
buildings erected in the city under the statute The
appeals insist that the material and construction of the
buildings proper and that neither the Board nor
the Inspector OF Buildings had any power to remove
the buildings which was done pending the decision Of
the Court below The District government maintains
that the trespass complained OF by Danese not
within the relief afforded by equity and that his bill
therefore, rightully dismissed and that for the
same reason the Board entitled to the perpetual
injunction granted in the other T. Cuffy and
J. w. Ross appellant; f. T. Stanton for the Board
No. 40. Bruner ct al VS. Walker ct al-Appeal from
the Circuit Court for the District OF Alabama. This
action to have set aside sale of the Huntsville
Hotel property, at Huntsville Ala, made to Walker in
pursuance of judgment obtained against the company
by the appellants through the services of Walkers
firm as attorneys. The appellants were merchants in
New York and in 1867 sent claim OF about So 600
the firm Of attorneys named for collection. The lat
ter advised sale of the claim which ccncurred in
the consideration being 81 200 The judgment was how
ever subsequently forfeited and at the sale Walker bid
in the property, as alleged for another party who Is
his codefendant Fraud is now alleged the appellants
claiming that the whole proceeding conducted in
the interest OF Walker, and that the claim that he
acted for another is u merely. The answer
averred that he acted agent only and that all the
funds paid as purchase money furnished by his
principal The decision below sustained the defence,
and the appeal questions the correctness OF that do.
csion the evidence adduced H. w. Ward for appel
lants; ?. Philips for appellees
No. A. Sawyer Il Frozier Turpin ct al-Appeal
from the Circuit Court for the District OF Massachu-
sets This bill by the appellant, assignee or
one Bachelor, a bankrupt against English nrm Of
which JurDn
appeees creditors to set aside fraudulent under
the Bankrupt act two conveyances Of property real
and personal made by the bankrupt to Turpn to hold
security for the baukrups Indebtedness TO his firm.
There question to OF the conveyances the
decree below in favor Of the asgnees being
in but to the other which was chattc mortgage,
and respect TO which the decree for the APP
pellees, u is claimed by the assgnees that II
Fraudulent and therefore void, and II Is contended
that the appelees preferred by IL with the full
knowledge OF the insolvency OF the firm This is de-
Med and the case turns upon the decision fths ques
ton OF fact j. G. Abbott and b. Dean Tor appellants
j. d. Ball for appcees
No ~ Hall ct al vs Lanning ct a.-Error to the
Circuit Court for the Northern District of lnos This
was action by the defendants in partners
against the plaintiffs partners also to certain
alleged loans and certain payment of freight and in
surunco, upon consignments, which claims had been
put into judgment In the State of New York and
now sued in that form. The chief points OF defence
counter claim for breach OF orders by the de-
PENDANTS below not selling consignment made to
them by which the plaintiffs there losers and the
objection that the judgment sued upon was not valid
judgment The judgment was allowed TO stand, and IL
is here insisted that the judgment was obtained
without jurisdiction In the Court rendering IL for want
of proper authority to the attorney bringing the suit
and IL Is argued that this question Of want Of jursdic
ton may always be interposed against judgment when
sought to be enforced when any benefit is claimed
for It. The want Of jurisdiction either OF the subject
matter or Of the person renders the judgment
nullity and that 20 show want OF jurisdiction the
rectals in the judgment record may be coEradictcd
S. W. Packard for plaintiff in error; S. s. Harris for
defendants.
No 43. The town OF Concord plaintiff in error, vs.
The Portsmouth Savings Bank.-Ths cause was argued
by Mr.. George H. Williams Of counsel for the plaintiff
in error, and submitted on printed arguments by Mr.
Isaac g. Wilson and Mr. s. b. Perry for the defendant
in error.
No ~ The Phillips and Colby Construction Com
pany, plaintiff in error, Mark T. Seymour OF al
The argument OF this cause commenced by Thomas
Dent OF counsel for the plaintiff In error and
tinued by Mr.. H. X. Wilton for the defendants in
Adjourned until Monday.