Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1901-05-22
DECIDED BY COURT OF APPEALS.
Opinions Handed Down in Cases Ot
Local Interest.

Local Interest.
The Court Of Appeals, in an opinion writ
ten by Mr.. Justice Morris, has reversed the
decree of dismissal Of the Supreme Court of
the District of Columbia and remanded the
cause with directions to vacate such de-
cree, to overrule the demurrers interposed
by the defendants and to require the de-
PENDANTS to answer the bill of complaint
and for such other proceedings as may be
just and proper and according to law.
The appeal was from decree whereby
upon q bill in equity filed to vacate a deed
purporting to convey certain real estate in
this city and upon a demurrer filed thereto
the court dismissed the bill Of complaint on
the ground of laches.
In the case of Dennis Tuohy, admins
traitor of the estate Of Thomas Tuohy, ap-
pellant, against Anthony Hunton the Court
of Appeals. in an opinion written by Mr.
Justice Morris, holds that the court below
was warranted in making the order ap-
pealed from. and that the order should be
affirmed. The order involved the payment
of costs in a proceeding in the Probate
Court
The Court Of Appeals. late this afternoon,
in an opinion written by Mr.. Chief Justice
Alvey, affirmed the judgment OF the lower
court in the case of Julius Latney, appel
liant. against the United States. Mr.. JUS
tfce Shepard dssented The case involved
the validity of a judgment Of the Police
Court, predicated upon what the appellant
through Attorney Levi David, claimed was
an insufficient and unconstitutional infor-
nation.
1t Is stated that two justices Of the Su-
prene Court of the District of Columbia
took different views Of the question at is
sue, and the cause has been followed with
much interest.
Latney was charged in Criminal Court
No. 1 with second offense petit larceny.
The indictment alleged that he had been
previously convicted in the Police Court
OF petit larceny. At the second ofrense trial
| it was sought by the government to show
| the record OF the first conviction.
Objection was made on the ground that
the information under which Latney had
been convicted In the Police Court was
improper in that It was anviolative of the
fourth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States. because the information
was not preceded by an affidavit setting
forth sufficient facts to warrant the issu-
| ance of the information, and that the in
formation itself was not under OATH
Justice Clabaugh held that the questions
raised were matters OF procedure and did
not invalidate the Judgment Of the Police
Court. The objections were overruled
The Court Of Appeals holds that by ap-
peartng and pleading to the information in
the Police Court and submitting to be tried
thereon without objection, the defendant.
| in legal contemplation admitted the valid
| ity and sufficiency of the information and
he could not afterward- be heard to deny
its legal sufficiencysI sasei
Where an information or complaint is
filed charging a crime over which the
| court has jurisdiction, 50 says the Court
the defendant to BE brought before it to
answer the charge. and when he is actually
before the court and is called upon to
| plead, If he has any objection to make as
| to the manner in which he was brought
! before 1t he ought to make the objection
| then, and move to quash the informa-
| ton, or that he be discharged therefrom.
Other opinions handed down late this at
| ternoon were as follows
Mitchell agt Evans; Judgment reversed,
! with costs; Mr.. Justice Morris dis, >nting
| Sanborn agt Maxwell; order affirmed,
with costs. -,
with costs. +-
Fedarwisch agt Alsop; decree reversed.
with costs.
Hartin ct al. agt. Brightwood Railway
| Company: judgment affirmed. with costs.
| United States agt. Davis, Chambers
Wallingsford, Jackson. Whitley and Fleet !:
orders reversed. with costs; Mr. Justice
| Shepard dissenting