The morning call., 1894-12-05
PHILBROOK AGAIN.
He's After Judge Coffey's
Scalp Now.
The Irate Attorney Is Determined to
Let the Light of Justice in
Upon His Wrongs.

Attorney Horace ". Philbrook is at it
again. Before long he will have included
every Judge on the Superior and Supreme
benches in the sweeping whirlwind of his
condemnation. This time it is Judge
Coffey who is his victim.
l. was only on Friday last that Philbrook
filed a sensational brief in the Leyinson VS..
Newman case, in which the most violent
attack was made upon Supreme Justice
Harrison. Pnilbrook actually presented
10 the Supreme Court for its consideration
brief in which member of that august
body was described as a cons pirator, a
rogue and a number of equally pleasant
things. Now it is Judge Cotfey.
1t is all about that never-ending Levin
son case. The brief filed on Friday las:
was on appeal from an order OF Judge
Wallace denying new tri,l of the suit
brought By the Leyinson heirs for an ac-
counting from the brothers Newman of
the assets of the partnership firm of New
man d LevinsoD. The Levlnson heirs.
marshaled by Philbrook, lost The suit.
The brief filed by Philbrock yesterday
was an appeal from an order OF Probate
Judge Coffey settling ths account of James
w. Goodwin. the suspended administrator
jects to the court having allowed the ad-
ministrator $343 81 in commissions, and
also the law firm of Henley d MacSherry
a fee of $500 The settlement of the ac-
count was strongly opposed by Philbrook
in Judge Coffey's courtroom, and Barclay
Henley was examined thereon at length.
There were several scenes ia court, and
more than once Pbilbrook came in for
reprimand from the court. Respecting
the conduct of Judge Coffey in the matter,
Philbrook states as follows:
The record shows that the cross-exam-
ination of these witnesses was most
strictly proper throughout. And the
record also shows that the Judge of the
court below, instead Of giving assistance
to the effort to elucldate the truth. was
continually coming to the rescue of the
witness and heaping abuse upon the cross
examiner.
This conduct of the Judge below was
examination of Howard MacSherry, and
was one of the worst exhibitions OF gross
partiality that could be imag ined,
"lt is submitted that the conduct of
the Judge below is full proof that the
trial allowed was only a mockery; that
the Judge below was determined to allow
fee to Henley and MacSherry, and to
allow the respondent the sums that were
allowed despite the proofs"
The brief also scores Henley and Mac.
Sherry 10 TIE following manner: 'While
that suit was on trial the respondent and
Henley and MacSherry, who were asso-
ciate attorneys ON line side of the plaintiff.
became traitors to the interests Of the de-
cedent's estate, and treacherously exerted
themselves to bring about a judgment for
the defendants, the surviving partners
and they succeeded In their treachery
"ihe entire conduct of respondent and
Barclay Henley and Howard MacSherry,
as disclosed in the record, in respect to the
case then on trial, was ,reacherous in the
extreme. How could there possibly be
fouler disgrace to the administration of
justice?"
In this frank, open way does Horace W.
Philbrook hope and expect to awaken the
Supreme Court to full sense of the
enormty of his wrongs. Perhaps Justice
Harrison will show due appreciation of
the honor donahinl in being permitted to
form one of the august body asked to de-
eide these important questions.