Evening star., 1933-04-03
COURT OF APPEALS
UPHOLDS z CASES
Two Other District Supreme
Court Decisions Set Aside.
Kerper Appeal Won.

The District Court of Appeals, In
four opinions handed down today. up
held two decisions of the District Su-
preme Court and set aside two others
decision Of the lower court holding
William H. Kerper. an employe Of the
southern Diaries. was not entitled to
compensation for the loss Of a foot
which was amputated after being
frozen while he was at work, was set
aside.
kerper was employed in the dairy's
cooling rooms. often working In tenn
perature Of 20 degrees below zero. On
December 4, 1880, his foot was frozen,
and subsequently was amputated.
Deputy Commissioner Robert j. Hoage
made an award, but the Employers
Liability Assurance Corporation of
London. England, sought and obtained
an injunction against the award.
It was contended Kerper was afflicted
with hardening Of the arteries and that
the injury was the normal effect of
cold on blood vessels diseased by long
standing arteriosclerosis and was not
an accidental injury within the mean
ing OF the statute. The Court of
Appeals held, however, that the deputy
commissioner was right In deciding
the extremely low temperature set in
motion chain of circumstances re-
Suitlng IN the amputation of the leg.
UNLOCKED for Event.
We think this was an unlooked-for
event and was, therefore. an accident" I"
the opinion said. Kerper and HoQQe
were represented by Attorney James ID
McCabe, while Attorneys Charles B.
Iebbs and Frank H. Myers appeared for
the insurance company,
mt - II
The higher court refused to reverse
decision adjudging Paul Du Vernal
Barry insane. Barry pleaded insanity
when tried several years ago for the
Staying OF 9 street. car motorman. He
was committed to st. Elizabeth,s Hos
pital IN 1923, and in 1927, contending
he had recovered his sanity, sought
his release. The hearing was without
q jury, and the court refused to release
him. This decision was upheld. At
torney Foster Wood represented Barry,
while United States Attorney Leo A.
Rover and his assistant, Charles B.
Murray, appeared for the Government.
Rosa Takahashi, whose suit against
the Hecht Co. for false arrest had been
dismissed on a directed verdict for the
defendant, was granted a new trial.
The woman, an employe Of the store,
had been arrested for the alleged theft
OF a customers ring. It was subse-
quently shown that she had not taken
the ring, and she was released.
Problem Of Investigation.
The question involved was whether
the officials of the store or the owner
OF the ring instigated the arrest. There
was testimony that store officials spe-
cifically disclaimed any part in the ar
rest. The upper court held, however,
that "the mere declaration of the
stores agent to the police that we have
nothing to do with the arrest is not
conclusive. The jury should have been
permitted to say whether that declara-
tion was made in good faith or whether
1t was merely subterfuge."
In an earlier trial of the case the
trial Judge also refused to permit the
issues to go to the jury, directing a
verdict for the defendant This was
likewise reversed. The opinion said the
ruling OF the court at the second trial
involved a misapprehension of our
opinion on the former appeal"
w. Gwynn Gardiner represented the
plalntin, while Attorneys Morris Simon,
Lawrence koenigsbcrger, Eugene Young
fendant.
The higher court also upheld the con.
Vlctlon OF James r. Posey, charged with
violating the prohibition laws. This
decision had the effect of refuting
charges by Jesse c. Duke, counsel for
Posey, the trial judge and the prose-
cutting attorney had deliberately falsi-
ned the record, of the case on appeal /"
The opinion said, I'VE are satisfied the
judgment OF the lower court should be
and hereby Is affirmed"