Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-04-07
IN COURT @tPPEALS
Opinions Handed Down in
Number of Causes.
s
HAYES VERSUS PALMER
JUDGMENT DIsCHAHGINa HA-
BEAs CORPUS WRIT SUSTAINED.
Affirmation Of Order In Case Of An
derson and Cullen Versus Morton
Other Decisions.
HAYES VERSUS PALMER

Other Decisions.
The Court of Appeals Of the District of
Columbia this afternoon handed down opin-
ions as follows:
John Hayes, appellant, against Aulick
Palmer marshal Of the United States in
and for the District OF Columbia; judg-.
nent appealed from affirmed with costs;
opinion by Mr.. Justice Shepard. The up
peal was from judgment discharging a
writ Of habeas corpus that had been Oh
tanned to arrest the execution of q warrant
for the extradition of the appellant. Hayes
was charged with gambling at Chesapeake
Junction.
The substantial question of the case was
whether under the evidence adduced, the
appellant was rightly adjudged to be
fugitive from justice Of the state of
Maryland. In the opinion of Chief Justice
Bingham Of the District Supreme Court the
evidence did not show conclusively that
Hayes was not personally present in Mary
land at the time the offense is alleged to
have been committed, and" says the
Court of Appeals. I'VE are not satisfied that
1t is sufficient to require the reversal Of his
Judgment.
Emma A. Knight against the Metropoli-
tan Railroad Company. Judgment reversed;
opinion by Mr.. Chief Justice Alvey. The
action was a proceeding to recover dam
ages for personal injuries. The Court of
Appeals holds that the District Supreme
Court erred in directing the jury to render
a verdict in favor Of the defendant.
Edward w. Anderson and Orlan Clyde
Cullen, appellants, against Baxter Morton.
order affirmed: opinion by Mr.. Justice
Morris. This was an appeal from an order
of the. District Supreme Court quashing a
writ of certiorar. tS+.s'.
District of Columbia, judgment affirmed,
for the reason that there was no error in
the ruling of the District Supreme Court
directing verdict for the defendant; opin-
ion by Mr.. Chief Justice Alvey. The action
was to recover damages suffered by the
plaintiff, occasioned by what was contend
ed to be nuisance, or an unlawful OBJ
struction, allowed to existein C street.
New Trial Given.
Henry O. Towles and Charles C. Bryan,
appellants, against ChaIaAs B. Tanner.
cause remanded to the Ustrict Supreme
Court with directions tasffRard new trial.
Opinion by Mr.. Justice Morris. The ap-
peal was from a judgment rendered in
suit wherein Charles q !TaAner was plain
tiff and Henry o. Towles. Charles c..
Bryan, Zenas c. Robbinsss&nd Gilbert B.
Towles were defendants, the last named as
the maker of a certain. prOMiSSory note for
S1,OUO, ana HODDlnS, IOWleS ana Bryan as
indorsers thereof. ~
The note figured in the Gettysburg land
transaction. which has been very largely
ventilated In the local. courts. An expert
witness testified that the onete had, been al
tered by the use Of chemicals The jury re-
turned verdict in favor of, the defendant,
Zenas c. Robbins, and. against the defend
ants. Henry o. Towles and q. c. Bryan, for
$1,000 the amount Of the mote, as 1t ap-
peared in suit. From the judgment, upon
exceptions reserved to pkliRgs of the trial
court in the matter OF. the admission Of tes-
timony deemed to be Irrelevant. and in the
matter Of the allowance and refusal OF in
structions to the jury requested by the
parties, the defendants Henry Q. Towles
and c. c. Bryan carried the cause to the
appellate court by appeal. boz 4s--@ u.
julius l. Atchison appellant. against
Barbara Wills, judgment affirmed ON the
ground that there was no error In the rul-
ings of the court below; opinion by Mr..
Chief Justice Alvey. The action was
brought by the appellee against the appel
liant, to recover damages for personal in
juries sustained by what was alleged to
have been the gross and wanton negligence
Of one Of the employees of the appellant -
Remanded for Further Proceedings.
William W.. Lesh. appellant against
Margaret A. Lesh: order appealed from at
fr1ned. with costs, and cause remanded for
further proceedings according to law. Opin-
ion by Mr.. Justice Morris. The suit was
for maintenance instituted by Mrs. Lesh
against her husband The court below or
dered that Mr. Lesh should pay his wife
SIS week Until further order and counsel
fee of $50. Mr.. Lesh appealed. -
Raymond 8. Donaldson, appellant,
against Benjamin F. Uhfelder; judgment
affirmed. Opinion by Mr.. Justice Shepard
The appellant sued the appellee in the
court Of Justice of the peace to recover
in that court the defendant appealed to the
District Supreme Court, wherein judgment
was rendered in his favor; and therefrom
the plaintiff prosecuted the appeal to the
Court Of Appeals. ,'i @t =
Edwin T. Morris and others, appellants,
against Ethan A. Hitchcock, William A.
Jones. ]. George Wright and ]. Blair Sheen
felt decree dismissing bill affirmed. Opfn-
was from decree of the District Supreme
Court sustaining demurrer to and dis
missing bill praying an injunction to re-
strain the Secretary Of the Interior and the
commissioner OF Indian affairs and officers
acting under their authority from selling
and removing from lands In the Indian ter
rftory occupied by the Chickasaw Indian
nation certain cattle belonging to the COM
plainants.
Patent Appeal Cases.
The Court of Appeals this afternoon also
decided the following appeals in patent
cases: $500 ..t- 9.
Joseph Sachs. appellant against Rudolph
Hundhausen: priority Of Invention awarded
to Sachs as to all of the counts Of the issue
except Nos. 8 and 6. and as to and judy
ment OF priority of invention awarded to
Hundhausen; opinion by Mr.. Justice Nor
ris. eraI
Thomas H. Macdonald appellant against
Thomas A. Edison: DECISION of the COM
missioner OF patents affirmed; opinion by
Mr.. Justice Shepard. II hsF
In the matter of the application Of Var
rem L. Starkey. decisidmdof the commits
sioner OF patents aff1rmeds opinion by Mr..
Justice Morris. 50 re
MISSED H1s,,EooT1Na.