Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-01-05
IMPORTANT DECISION
Court of Appeals Afirms Po-
lice Court Judgment
ON MEDICAL LICENSE
COURT DEFINES STATUS OF PRAC-
TiCING MEDICINE.
Decides Also Matters as to Habeas
Corpus, to Recover Possession of
Property and Will Case.

BY an opinion written by Mr.. Justice
Shepard the Court of Appeals this after
neon affirmed the judgment of the Ponce
Court in the case of Nathan a. Springer,
plaintiff in error, against the District Oh
Columbia.
Springer was convicted of practicing med
icine without license. The argument that
Springer was acting as an advertiser OF MS
sanitarium in an adjacent state ana as
mere dealer in a special medicine or rem
edy, says the Court Of Appeals, does not
meet the evidence. The court adds: I'm
doubtedly he could advertise himself ana
his business elsewhere and also advertise
and sell his remedies as patent medicines
are allowed to be sold in the District of
Columbia provided he refrained from MAX
ing diagnoses and prescribing medicines.
."Sening his compound to such persons as
he might examine and pronounce mt SUD
tects of medical treatment was pracuclnS
medicine as much If he had given them,
instead, an ordinary prescription that could
be satisfied in any regular drug store
The Court of Appeals. by an opinion writ
ten by Mr.. Justice Shepard and handed
down today, reversed the judgment of the
lower court in the case of Amy j. Rule.
superintendent OF the reform school for
girls, against Helen Geddes. A petition for
writ of habeas corpus was filed by Helen
.,
S. Peters, April Is last. alleging that she
was seventeen years of age and was, with
cut authority of law, incarcerated In the
girls reform school. The superintendent
Of the school contended that the girl was
held by regular commitment under the law.
Judgment was entered discharging the girl
from custody. In reversing this judgment
the Court of Appeals directs that the Gus
tody of the girl be returned to the superin-
tendent Of the reform school for girls
The Court of Appeals, by an opinion writ
ten by NJ. Justice Morris and handed down
today. affirmed the judgment of the lower
court in the case OF Eliza Brown, appellant,
against George W. f. Slater. The case
was originally instituted before justice of
the peace by Slater, as purchaser In sale
under 4 deed of trust or mortgage, which
had been foreclOsed. to recover the posses
sion of the property which he had pur-
chased, against the appellant, who was the
grantor or mortgagor in the deed and who
continued to hold possession after the sale
and conveyance to the appellee.
The matter was taken to the District Su-
preme Court by writ Of certiorari. The writ
was subsequently Quashed, and the cause
was ordered remanded to the justice of the
peace. A motion to vacate the order was
overruled and an appeal to the Court Of
Appeals taken. The appeal was dismissed
on the ground that the order was not ap-
pealable When the cause was sent back to
the Justice of the peace a new writ of GER
tiorari was sued out on the same identical
ground and in due course the case again
reached the Court of Appeals.
The Court of Appeals asks-"Js there no
limit to the number of writs of certiorari
which litigant may sue out in the same
case upon the same identical ground?' The
decency ard propriety of legal proceedings
and the principle of the doctrine of res judi
cata, says the Court of Appeals impera-
lively demand that no such course of pro-
cedure be tolerated The appellate court
also answers in the. negative the question
whether In proceedings before a justice of
the peace for unlawful detainer of real
estate by tenant as against his landlord
or by any other person in the category Of
those enumerated in section 20 of the code
there is concurrent Jurisdiction given to the
supreme Court of the District whereby the
proceedings can be removed to that court
FOR trial there in the first instance
BY an opinion, also written by Mr.. JUS
tee Morris, and handed down today, the
Court of Appeals holds that there was no
reversible error in the rulings of the trial
court and that the decree appealed from
should be affirmed, in the case of Ida F.
Slant and Almira V. Brown appellants.
against the American Security and Trust
company. The appeal was from decree
admitting to probate paper purportine to
be the last will of George Brown.