Jones & Mann v. Savage

10 Wend. 621
New York Supreme Court·Decided February 15, 1834·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

By the Court,

Sutherland, J.

This very question of the liability of the attorney to costs, was under consideration when this case was before us on a motion for a new trial, and it was then held that he was liable. 6 Wendell, 660. From the case then presented to us it appeared, not only that the attorney was retained by, but that the suit was prosecuted for the benefit of a resident of the state. So in Waring v. Barret, 2 Cowen, 460, we granted a rule against the attorney, although the real plaintiff, one Brady, was a resident of the state.

Motion granted.

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

Jones & Mann v. Savage, 10 Wend. 621 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1834).

10 Wend. 621 (Jones & Mann v. Savage) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Willmont v. Meserole
16 Abb. Pr. 308 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1875)
Boyce v. Bates
8 How. Pr. 495 (New York Supreme Court, 1853)