M'Minn v. Richtmyer

New York Supreme Court

M'Minn v. Richtmyer

3 Hill & Den. 236

DecidedJuly 15, 1842

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Hill & Den. 236 (M'Minn v. Richtmyer) 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

M'Minn v. Richtmyer, 3 Hill & Den. 236 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1842).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court Cowen, J.

[237]*237Judgment affirmed.

[236]*236The fact that the note was left with Daniel for collection, was, I think, enough to warrant the justice in coming to the conclusion that he had authority to appear as attorney for Richtmyer. A general authority to col[237]*237lect, implies a power so to appear ; and the fact that Daniel had the note in his custody, was a circumstance tending further to show the power.

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

By the Court Cowen, J.

[237]*237Judgment affirmed.

[236]*236The fact that the note was left with Daniel for collection, was, I think, enough to warrant the justice in coming to the conclusion that he had authority to appear as attorney for Richtmyer. A general authority to col[237]*237lect, implies a power so to appear ; and the fact that Daniel had the note in his custody, was a circumstance tending further to show the power.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Hill & Den. 236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mminn-v-richtmyer-nysupct-1842.