Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-09-26
Attorney for the District Details
Business Of His Office.
DECISIONS BY COURT OF APPEALS
Proceedings in Street Extension
Cases Given Attention.
ROUTINE WORK OF THE YEAR

Mr.. Andrew B. Duvall the attorney for
the District, today submitted to the Com
missioners a report of the business of his
office for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1889
During eleven months of the period cover
ed by the report the business Of the office
was under the direction of Mr.. 8. 7. Thorn
as, who for six years had been the attorney
for the District of Columbia. March H.
1899. his resignation was accepted to take
effect May 81, 1899, and Mr.. Duvan was
appointed attorney for the District.
During the year, Mr. Duvall states, there
were $40 advisory opinions by the attorney
at the request of the Commissioners, six
teen of which were delivered during the
month OF June. Many of the questions re-
ferred to the attorney for opinion were
novel and intricate in their character, fire.
quently involving considerable labor and
research.
During the fiscal year thirty-four cases
were tried or otherwise disposed of In the
Supreme Court of the District.
After detailing the points at issue In these
cases and stating the result of the trials,
Mr.. Duvall says that thirteen cases, known
as the flood cases." growing out of the
flooding Of premises fronting Missouri ave-
nue. and Pennsylvania avenue during the
rainy season Of 1885, were dropped from
the trial calendar and placed on the stet
calendar.
There remain for trial on the law calen-
dar twelve cases and on the equity calen-
dar three cases.
Judgments in certiorar were entered In
forty -four cases quashing assessments for
taxes because Illegally assessed.
DEGREES in equity were entered IN three
cases, canceling taxes more than twenty
years old and relieving the property from
the cloud on the title of such taxes.
DEGREES in equity following Brewer VS..
District of Columbia, Mack, 274 were en-
tered in twenty-three cases in favor of
holders of tax deeds. canceling taxes as
sessed prior to the date Of the tax sales. in
pursuance of which tax deeds were issued.
Before Court of Appeals.
Mr.. Duvall states that a number Of cases
to which the District was a party were dis
posed of by the Court of Appeals. The de-
cisions were published in The Star. and in
referring to that decision of the Appellate
Court in which 1t was held that agents Of
property not liable under the act re-
quring the removal of snow and ice from
sidewalk, the Commissioners legal ad-
wiser says: The subject-matter being
purely municipal in its character, the law
should be amended in this respect when
other amendments are presented
The decision of the Court of Appeals In
District agt. Wormley and District agt.
Allen, decided June g. 1899, Mr. Duvall
says. is of great value. The first was a
test case under the reassessment law. The
Court of Appeals reversed the judgment of
provisions of the act of Congress of April
"a 1896 the Commissioners had power to
reaSsess abutting property upon due notice
of action being given in cases where assess
rnents for the construction of the sidewalk
levied under the act of August g. 1880 (26
Stat, 1866, had been set aside in certiorari
proceedings because of the failure the
part of the District authorities to give due
notice to the owners of abutting property.
The case of the District agt. Allen also
involved a reassessment. The original as
sessment, levied by the board of public
works, was vacated by the judgment of the
Supreme Court of the District Of Columbia
because notice had been given to the
property holder prior to the making Of the
improvement or at any otlcr time, except
by service of bills for the work itself. The
reassessment was made under the act of
Congress Of April "a, 1896 ard the court
held it good for the reason set forth in the
Wormley case.
OF Great Value.
'The decision in favor of the District"
says the attorney, sin the two last mention
ed cases Is of the greatest value. 1t will en-
abe the reassessment and collection of the
great bulk of local assessments which have
been heretofore set aside in certiorari. The
court held in it's opinion that Congress in
legislating for the District may order To-
cal Improvement designating the property
assessed account of special benefits,
and prescribe the proportion OF the amount
and the rule of proportionment without
preliminary notice to owners to appear
and be heard in respect Of the propriety
and character Of the improvement or the
designation of the taxing district area, but
in doing Congress may not substantially
exceed the actual benefits the owner of
abutting property or neighborng property
receives from the Improvement that Con-
gress has power to order the construction
of sidewalks In the streets of the city OF
Washington partly at the cost of the own
ers of property abutting thereon, and no
fh.an
time before the settlement Of the assess
ment against his property, that he may be
heard, If he SO desire, to question the con-
stitutiOna,ity of the law, the facts in re-
Spect of the cost of the work and whether
the amount charged exceeds the special
benefit received by him. And where an as
sessment for such purpose has been de-
clared by the courts to be invalid for fail
ure to give some such notice Congress may
by statute provide for a reassessment
through proceeding having due regard to
the constitutional rights of the land owner
The two cases have been appealed to the
Supreme Court of the United States.
stin on the Calendar.
There remains for trial on the calendar of
the court of appeals eight cases to which
the District is a party. Twelve street ex-
tension cases were filed in the District Su-
preme Court, namely: For widening Of 10th
street; extension of Rhode Island avenue:
extension of 10th street; of Howard ave-
nue.; opening of s, 22d and Decatur streets:
extension of Pennsylvania avenue south
east; of Staughton street, of lexington
place; of 9th street; of Sherman avenue:
of 18th street, and of New Hampshire ave.
nue..
The several acts of Congress under
which these cases were Instituted directed
that the proceedings should be taken in ac-
cordance with chapter XII of the Revised
Statutes of the District of Columbia, which
provides that the marshal shall summon a
Jury OF seven to assess the damages, and a
written verdict Is to be signed by them
or majority of them: and If the proper
authorities or any of the owners of the
land are dissatisfied with the verdict thus
rendered. second jury of twelve may be
summoned and the verdict of the second
jury signed by each Of the jurors, or
majority OF them, shall be returned to the
proper authorities at their next meeting
and recorded as final and conclusive
AFTER referring to the progress Of these
proceedings Mr.. Duvan says:
1t Is to be very much regretted that
the proceedings in these several street eY-