Butcher v. Henning

35 N.Y.S. 1006, 97 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 565, 70 N.Y. St. Rep. 665, 90 Hun 565
New York Supreme Court·Decided December 3, 1895·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In Langley v. Warner, 3 N. Y. 327, it was held by the court of appeals that where a judgment had been collected, and the money paid to the attorney who prosecuted the suit, an action will not lie against the attorney to recover back the money after a reversal of the judgment, although, by agreement between him and his client, he retained the money in payment of a debt from the latter to him. The facts in the case cited were quite similar to those appearing in the case under consideration. We are not aware that the doctrine established in Langley v. Warner, supra, has ever been doubted or overruled. Grauer v. Grauer, 20 N. Y. Supp. 854; Wright v. Nostrand, 53 N. Y. Super. Ct. 381-386; Simpson v. Hornbeck, 3 Lans. 53-55; Forstman v. Schulting, 108 N. Y. 110-113, 15 N. E. 366.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Butcher v. Henning, 35 N.Y.S. 1006, 97 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 565, 70 N.Y. St. Rep. 665, 90 Hun 565 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1895).

35 N.Y.S. 1006 (Butcher v. Henning) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pendergast v. Muns
238 N.W. 344 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1931)
In re White
82 A.D. 553 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)
Shotwell v. Dixon
66 A.D. 123 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1901)