Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-02-08
VERY STRANGE CASE.
APPELLATE COURT DECISION ~
SUIT OF HARRISON WAGNER.
SECURED MANY THOUSAND JUDGMENTS
County Commissioners rs Defend
nnts--DisabiIities Of Administra-
tors; Important Railroad Matter
Verdict Against nm Insurance Co.

tofsi important hhiirohh hhtcf-
Verdict Against nm Insurance Co.
The United states Circuit Court Of APP
peals convened here yesterday. with
Judges Con. Morris. Brawley. ard Wad-
dnI presiding. 4 number OF opinions were
handed down. one of them. rendered I'm
the case Of Harrison Wagner against the
County Commissioners Of Frederick coun-
ty, Md, goes 70 show that truth IS. in
deed stranger than fiction.
The case IS quite unique The plaintiff
in error, who was the plaintiff in the
court below. instituted his action at law
in the Circuit Court Of the United states
for the District OF Maryland on the Sth
day Of June, 1Sf. In his petition he de-
clared on 1000 judgments. still unsatis-
fed. alleged to have been rendered I'm his
favor during the month OF June, 1855. by
one John Haynes. a Justice Of the Peace
for the said county.
The defendants demurred 10 the COM
plaint which was overruled. and they
then pleaded: First. that the alleged
cause Of action did not accrue within
three years. second, that there was no
record OF the Judgments sued upon re-
naming among the. records of John
HAYNES. the Justice who, 70 d. alleged. rem
dered them: third that the defendants
were never indebted 10 the plaintiff, as
altered. fourth. that the said John
Haynes had no jurisdiction, as
Justice OF the Peace. 10 render such julg-
ments. fifth. that the alleged judgments
were forgeries: sixth. that the said juds-
ments were an procured by fraud.
/ The plaintiff, for the purpose Of sustain
| ing the ISSUES ON hts part, offered In evil
dence 100 sets of printed papers pur-
porting 20 De under the hand ana seal Oh
/ John Haynes. Justice Of The Peace, said
plaintiff claiming that the same were
/ copies of the original Judgments rendered
/ bv that Justice. each for So debt and
I $3.50 costs. amounting in Che aggregate
/ to H1l430J.
The court below directed Judgment for
! the defendants. ON the ground that the
certificates of the Secretary of state Were
not sufficient in law % prove the genSine-
ness of the transcripts This opinion was
/ affirmed by the circuit court of Appeals
| the opinion i'm the case being written Dy
/ Judge COZ.
! AN INTERESTING RAILROAD CASE
The Judgment of the lower court I'm the
/ case Of ". H. Hodges anL b.. y. NC NJ,
I han. administrators OF samuei IL; lu. ri
/ deceased against J.. Il. KlmDdll all
] Henry Fink receivers OF the -Noiioih
/ and Western Railroad Comp my, was IT,
/ vcrsed bv this court in an opinion VIII
/ ten bv Judge WaddiI. cOuc1ireI IN 10y
/ Judge COT The plainrns IN error IN,
/ stituted their suit I'm the Circuit Court ol
| the United states FOR the western bis
/ trict Of Virginia 90 recover OF lle "'
/ foudants damages occasiOued by the dealn
of thlir intestate iu the stale " y IT.
J giuia. while in the employ OF the ue-
/ PENDANTS The suit was instituted on lAe
] Both DAY of August. 1870. ~ the OcloDei
/ form of that year tho olfenldni@ APP
/ uo4rrd and fled q special demurrer TO the
/ declaration alleging the failure 90 snow
/ adverse citizenship in the plainuls, anu
/ the demurrer being sustained, the pam
/ tns We're allowed to amend their decld'
| ration. averring that the plainuuss al
| miuistratOrs. We're residents of the Stat
/ az Tennessee. and thCreupOn defendant
pleaded not guilty. and upon which plea
issue was Joined by the defendants.
IIAD NOT QUALIFIED HERE.
At the May term. 1895. The case was by
/ consent and az The defendants costs
/ continued. and at the october term, 1870
! a further continuance was had, nut a
/ whose instance it docs not appear. Ol
/ the 2lth n May. lH the defendants Pc
] scented p special plea, nFcrllns lual tti'
/ plaintiffs. adminlstra h4d never guam
/ that one j. W Mort was the virginia al
/ ministratOr then and when the suit wa
. instituted. 10 the hllng Of this pie,
plaintiffs excepted. but the court allowed
I The sJme 10 De hled, and gave the pam
. tits ninety days within which 10 Hl'
on the 7th day Of July. 1897, said reph
/ cation was filed. setting forth. in sub
/ stance. that at the institution or tne SUI
plaintiffs had not qualified in the state
/ of Virginia. but in the stale Of tennessee
intestate's dOmicile, and that az said TIM
/ they were the only personal representa-
/ tyes Of the decedenLi may IL was ltt'
/ that subsequent 20 the bringing or tl'
/ suit SAID j. W. Mort had qualified in IA.
/ state OF Virginia as administrators bu
/ that he had resigned az such, and ina
/ they had duly taken ont anciIary letter.
| Of administration in Virginia on SAID rs
/ tate and were the only representative
/ of Samuel T. lusk. deceased and they
asked leave 10 amend their declaration
showing their qualification In the STATE
jude Wiaddm. in rendering the opln
'The learned Judge of the lower cour
N7 Fed. $50 apparently proceeded upoi
the theory that plaintiffs not havins
taken out letters of administration upOi
the estate of their intcstate IN the STATE
of Virginia at the time OF the institution
Of the suit the same could not De nam
tanned. that the defect could not be cure'
lv amendment. and that plaintiffs. no
having qualified in tho state at that time
occupied the relation of mere Stranger
10 the litigation
After q lengthy argument Of the points
involved. he SAYS. "Our conclusion Is tina
upon the fling Of the replication 70 th'
plea raising the question or the rlght o
plaintiffs to sue that the amendment
asked for hy them showing their qualiii
cation as administrators OF detedent ~
this state should have been allowed, anC
the.case proceeded with on It's merits {,
its final conclusion. and not dismissed
as was done: therefore, the Judgment o.
the court below Will be reversed, and th'
case remqndcd TO that court. with in
structi0ns 10 proceed therein with thu
uiaI I'M accordanc6 with the views herei1
expressed
PLEA OF INSURANCE COMPANY.
The verdict I'm an interesting life-insu
rance case was affirmed, in the case o
tho Fidelity Mutual Life Association, o.
pbiladelphia. Pa. against David Il. Mile
and Ann IT, Percy executors or william
r. Percy. deceased The executors Wh
are defendants in error, Instituted SUI
ON December 18th. on a policy OF ln-u
rance. iusuring me nle OF o., W llll'I N y.
Percy for s25 600 payable 70 his legal repre-
-enfa lives v-ftrfn ninety days after salts
f4rfor,. ur0of of death. The death OF tn
insured ". g. Percy. occurred on IN
uipht Of the 2Uh of May, 1877, 10y drown
ing i'm the Chesapeake ana ONO c1nHl
about twelve miles peloW CulnDo az,
lr9 the horse ur0u which he was rdiu'
9iong the tow-path suddenly plungini
INTO The canal with him. The defendant
an error were duly appointed executor
III his last viii and testament
Tho insurance company tled ten pleaS
eettino up the defence that The pOilcy wa
attained by deception In various FORM.
fHn