The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1917-01-22

1
| rive at my cheerful room in the south
/ west corner of the capitol, put off my
| coat and work until o'clock p. m.
| There are four large windows, two in
the south and two in the west, through
which come the cheering rays Of the
sun, saying: Work, work, work.
This week it seems the judges have
not made much progress and yet dur
ing business hours we have all been
working like beavers. We have been
| looking after the odds and ends and
| have heard arguments in seven cases,
and have virtually decided them.
Let me tell you how the business
runs. When a party appeals to the
supreme court he must cause to be
| transmitted to the clerk three or more
| typewriter or printed copies of the
appeal record. Then each party makes
and files several copies of a printed
| brief, which should contain a clear
| and concise statement of the case, the
facts conceded and the facts disputed.
| with the points Of law and OF fact to
be decided. The clerk sets for argu-
| ment every week six or more cases
and notifies the attorneys. At or after
| the time of argument the chief justice
assigns to each judge one or more
cases in which to write a decision.
| When all the judges examine and ap-
prove a decision, they sign up on the
| original. Then it is filed with the
clerk and he gives notice to the attor-
neys, and that ends the matter unless
| there be motion for rehearing.
Now it often happens that a lawyer
has not a way of stating hts case so
as to appeal to the understanding OF
the judges and he may talk over their
heads, while they sit and listen like
dummies. To prevent that have as
sumed the task of looking into the
| records Of every case before it is
argued, and then / am in position to
| state the case in a few words so that
any person can understand it, and to
direct counsel to the material points
of the case and to discuss it with the
| lawyers. In that way we save much
| time and come to good understand
! ing Of the case, Now / do not claim
the exclusive right of examining into
all the records and acting as a volun-
| teer spokesman for the court or myself
when the lawyers argue case, and
will gladly resign the job to any other
judge who is anxious to undertake 1t.
Let me give you an illustration to
show how it works: At Minot, per-
son is convicted on a supposed double
charge of maintaining a common
nuisance by keeping a house for the
sale of Intoxicating liquor contrary to
law. His sentence is two years in the
states prison. He appeals to the SUI.
preme court. His case is called for
argument and his attorney is about to
address the court. Then Judge Robin
son says: 81 have looked into the rec
ord of this case and find there is no
complaint or information charging a
public offense, which is necessary to
sustain the conviction. While the
information charges that at certain
time and place, some seven years be-
fore the complaint was made, the de-
PENDANT committed a common uni
sance and that he was convicted Of the
same, it does not contain word to
show that the common nuisance had
any relation to the sale or giving away
of intoxicating liquors. For aught that
appears from the complaint, the null
sance might have been the obstruction
Of highway. Under the constitution
no man can be deprived of life, liberty
or property without strict observ-
ance of the law. He cannot be con-
victed of a crime and sent to states
prison only on a complaint or informa-
ton charging him with the commits
sion of crime"
Neither the attorneys nor the trial
judge had observed this fatal defect
in the complaint. The case did not
merit consideration of five minutes.
Let me tell you of motion for a
rehearing in the Grant Youmans case.
When this case was called had just
passed two days and part of two
nights in examining the massive rec
ords, and thought that knew more
of the case than the attorneys. Hence
/ put the case to the court and coun-
sci in this way: Some two and one
half years ago, at Minot, the plaintiff
was a banker. He and his wife
practically owned and controlled a
bank with large resources and de-
posts, which was doing fairly pros
porous business, but the bank examin-
err and others came upon him and
forcibly closed the bank, taking all
the property of the PLAINTIFF and of his
wife and the bank. In time he
brought an action to recover against
them big damages. The case was
tried before Judge Kneeshaw, who
directed a verdict for the defendants.
The plaintiff appeals to this court and
the appeal was filed on Sept. 20, 1915.
Now, according to the usual practice,
the case could not have been put upon
the calendar for argument until the
December term, 1916, but in some way
it was rushed and advanced, and it
was decided without any argument. A
motion for a rehearing was made and
it was decided against the plaintiff on
Dec. %, 1915. Now the case comes be-
for the court on a motion to recall the
remittitur, to reconsider the case, to
reverse the judgment and to grant a
new trial. The motion is based on
errors of law occurring at the trial and
because three judges who signed tho
decision and denied the rehearing did
so after their term of Office had ex-
pired. and after their successors had
duly qualified. 1t may we'll be con-
tended that the three judges held over
Wrongfully and that they were with
out Jurisdiction just as much as If
they had held over until the present
time. but all that is a minor question
in the case. The real point is that
there was an abundance of evidence
to go to the jury on the proof of big
damages. and the record abounds with
errors and shows that the trial ia