Dougherty v. Andrews

19 Ind. 406
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 15, 1862
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 19 Ind. 406 (Dougherty v. Andrews) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dougherty v. Andrews, 19 Ind. 406 (Ind. 1862).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Suit on notes. The record shows that the parties come by counsel, and a rule for answer is granted; and, that, on a subsequent day, they by counsel come, and it is agreed that judgment shall be rendered, etc. Judgment was rendered in accordance with the agreement.

M. M. May and B. F. Davis, for the appellants.

. The record does not show that a summons was issued or served, nor a personal appearance of defendants; it is, therefore, insisted, that the judgment is a nullity; that under sec. 778, p. 202, 2 R. S., a written power or authority is requisite before the attorney could so act.

If the defendants had been notified, the written authority was not necessary to be produced to enable the attorney to act. If they had not been notified, etc., they should have applied to the Court below to be relieved from the judgment; if that Court had refused the proper relief upon a case made, then this Court could be appealed to.

The appeal dismissed, with costs.

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

Related

Ryors v. King
48 Ind. 237 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1874)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 Ind. 406, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dougherty-v-andrews-ind-1862.