Tolman v. Treat

106 F. 679, 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 4487
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York·Decided March 14, 1901·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

LACOMBE, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above). The written instrument consists of two separable ones, — ra promissory note,.and a clause containing certain provisions as to the entering of judgment thereon in the event of nonpayment. This last, however, does not seem to be a power of attorney, within the meaning of the section relied on. It is what is known as a “warrant of attorney,” and is in fact a retainer, by virtue of which an attorney at law is authorized to appear in court in behalf of a client, and take certain steps as attorney in litigation to which the client is a party. The court is not satisfied, from the text of the act, that congress intended to subject such retainers to the provisions of the stamp tax law Judgment for plaintiff.

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

Tolman v. Treat, 106 F. 679, 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 4487 (circtsdny 1901).

106 F. 679 (Tolman v. Treat) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Capitol Trading Co.
229 F. 806 (N.D. New York, 1916)
In re Hawley
220 F. 372 (S.D. New York, 1915)