Case ID: edw-ch_2/html/0165-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "The Vice-Chancellor:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ray and others, executors of Ray, deceased v. Macomb.
    
      January 27. 1834.
    The Solicitor for a complainant should not be the Solicitor of a receiver in the cause.
    This was a mortgage case ; and a receiver had Been appointed.
    He now petitioned that the tenants attorn and the defendant furnish a rental, &c.; and the petition had the name of the same solicitor annexed to it as appeared for the complainants. An objection was taken to it on this ground; and Smith on Receivers, p. 25. 26. was referred to.
    Mr. William H. Harison for the petitioner.
    Mr. A. S. Garr in opposition.
   The Vice-Chancellor:

I am inclined to uphold the objection taken to the motion. It is best for a receiver to employ any other solicitor than the one retained by the complainants ; but, as the point of practice is new in otir courts, let the motion be denied without costs.