Omaha daily bee., 1902-08-10

ion, clearly and directly determining that
the original judgment In the Moores case
settled all controversy between the parties.
and was res adjudicata as determined In tho
Kennedy case. Judge Holeomb added Ma
separate opinion, stating In positive terms
that on the question Of the doctrine Of res
adjudicata as held and applied by Judgs
Sullivan, he concurred fn>all that was said
and eoncurred in Judge sull!van's opinion
Judge sedgwick did not express any opinion
on the question Of res adjudicata.
Notwithstanding this third detefmina-
ton Of the rlghts Of the parties, a motion
for a rehearing was nled by Mt. Wright and
his associates. The question OF the res
adiudicata effect Of the Moores Judgment
again came up for consideration and an
opinion was written by Judge ~sedgwick,
holding IN substance that the matter in CON.
troversy Ia the Moores case was merely the
right Of the appointees OF the mayor and
council to the ofices TO which they had
been appointed for the term Of their sp-
p~olntment. Judge Sullivan does not appear
to have written any opinion in addition to
the two which he had previously written in
favor Of the contention OF Che a~ppolntees
OF the mayor and council, bht Judge Hol-
comb appended to the opinion Of Judge
sedgwick the statement that he was not
prepared TO express an opinion different
from the one previously concurred In by
him. The opinion previously ooncnFTed Ia
by Judge Hoicomb was the opinion Of Judge
Sullivan. to which reference Is made. hold
ing that a question once determined BY &
Judgment on sts merits is forever settled.
and that the question Of res adtudicata de-
clded In the Kennedy case was decided
rightly.
ITO sum up the situation. 30 far az tha
supreme judges are concerned, It is this;
Judge Sullivan has twice decided. in two
able nj exhaustive opinions. that, regards
less Of what the law Is or may have been
declared to have been. the judgment en-
tered In the Moorea case was conclusive and
res adjudicata as between the members
appointed by Moores and those appointed
by the governor, and was biniing on their
successors In once. In this view Of the
case Judge Holcomh, in express terms, has
concurred, and IN express terms has declined
70 recede from his position. Judge sedg-
wick. IN his opinion, which. 30 far a. I
can ascertain from the record. is neither
concurred in nor dissented from by Judge
Sullivan declares that the judgment IN the
Moores case Is not res adiudieata beyond
the term Of once in controversy 10 that
tu1Ns AA0 NaNetA'Af ANNNNNAa - " Inv
res ad5ndicata nature OF the second judg-
ment in favor Of the appointees OF the
mayer and council In the Kennedy case "
not referred TO or considered.
II am conndeut that when the matter Is
fully and fairly presented to the supreme
court that both Judge Sullivan and Judge
Holcomb will stand by their opinions %
previously recorded and that when the
question Of the effect OF the judgment IN
the Kennedy case IL presented and 0
sldered that Judge sedgwick viii conceds
that the previous opinions Of Judges Sui
livan and Holeomb are sound and correct.
And. without reference TO whether their
opinions are correct or not. as applied to
the judgment In the Moores case. the prin-
cipie involved In the Kennedy case being
the res adjudieata effect and force Of the
judgment IN the Mocres case. Judge sedg-
wick will hold. in accordance with over
vhslming authority. that the judgment ia
the Kennedy case, which up 10 the pres
ent time he has not considered or passed
on, 10 final and res adjudicata and forever
settles the right OF the e~ontendins par
ties"