Lamoreux v. Morris

4 How. Pr. 245
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 15, 1840
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 4 How. Pr. 245 (Lamoreux v. Morris) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lamoreux v. Morris, 4 How. Pr. 245 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1840).

Opinion

Parker, Justice.

This court has held that the attorney is liable for sheriff’s fees, upon the ground that the sheriff is obliged to serve process. (1 Caines, 192; 5 John. R. 255, 368; 4 Wend. 474.) A different rule prevails in Vermont, (1 Ver. R. 101,) but I believe in this state it has never been decided that the attorney was liable for witnesses’, referee’s or commissioner’s fees. In Howell v. Kinsey, 1 How. Pr. Rep. 105, it was decided that the attorney was not liable for referee’s fees. I think the petitioner could not have recovered if he had brought an action against the solicitor. The solicitor received the money for the plaintiff. He was bound to pay it over to the plaintiff, or to account for it on settlement with him. There is no doubt of the plaintiff’s liability to the petitioner.

But the petitioner asks for a remedy by attachment. To this certainly he is not entitled. There is no relation here between the solicitor and the petitioner, as between attorney and client. There is no [246]*246violation of confidence and no "breach of trust. The money was collected for the plaintiff, and not for the petitioner. The latter had no agency in or control over its collection. The solicitor and the petitioner were both officers employed to perform several and different duties in the progress of the cause, but I do not see that they have any claims on each other. They can apply only to the plaintiff, and not to each other, for compensation.

Motion denied, with costs.

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

Related

Ellison v. Lindsley
33 N.J. Eq. 258 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1880)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 How. Pr. 245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lamoreux-v-morris-nysupct-1840.