Charge of Fraud in Procurement of Lease to Be Denied. A copy of the opinion of the Court of Appeals, in the case of Annie BE, Robinson and James Dorsey Robinson, her husband, against Guiseppe Mar ino and Michael Passaro and others, in which, as reported in this paper on Monday, the Decree of the Circuit Court was affirmed, insofar as its jurisdiction is concerned, has been re ceived here. The case will now be tried here in court, . Attorney Weinberg, for the Robin sone, raised the question that Marino and Parsaro do her have hdr title to the fiend in dispute, in that the deed from Charlotte R. Geisinger to Mary Frances Abney, who was the predeces sor in title of Marino and :’advaro, is null and void “because the same was not intended to take effect until after the death of Charlotte RR. Geisinger, who is still living, and because said deed was never delivered to the said Mary Frances Abney, or to any one in her behalf, by the said Charotte R. Geisinger, but that the said deed was abstracted from the custody of said Charlotte R. Geisinger, without her knowledge or consent. The plaintiffs contended that the Robinsons could not raise this ques tion, as to the right of the plaintiffs to maintain the suit, because, they said, the Robinsons, were the tenants of the plaintiffs, and were therefore estopped to deny their land lords’ title. The Court of Appeals has now de cided that the Robinsons can raise the question, as to the right of the plaintiffs to maintain the suit, but that the name should be presented In the answer to be filed by the Robinsons are a matter of defense. In this connection, Judge Adkins, who delivered the opinion of the Court of Appeals, said: “Finally, it is contended by ap pellants that at the exhibit filed with bill and allegations {n the bill itself, show that plaintiffs’ title was questioned by the de fendants, and the title to ‘and was involved, the Court was without jurisdiction. **** “The question whether the plaintiffs were without right to bring the suit for want of inter est, which is incidental to the real question an issue, should be raised as a matter of defense.” Attorney Weinberg said he proposes to prepare the answer as promptly as possible, in which he will deny the charge of fraud, in the procurement of the lease, and renew the allegation that the plaintiffs are without title to the property in dispute.