Case ID: scl_17/html/0448-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Colcock, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

S. & M. Allen v. Benjamin Green.
    Charleston,
    March, 1830.
    It is not necessaiy that a warrant of attorney should be filed, to enable the attorney on record to conduct a suit to judgment. But the Court may, in. its discretion, require a warrant to be produced, on proof, that the attorney is proceeding without authority, for the purpose of oppression, or for any other sinister purpose.
    Tried before Mr. Justice Gantt, at Georgetown, Spring Term, x 1829.
    The defendant objected to the plaintiffs’ taking a verdict in this case, on the ground, that no warrant of attorney had been filed with the declaration, pursuant to the st. 4 Ann. c. 16.. P. L. 94. The presiding Judge overruled the objection; and after verdict for the plaintiff, the defendant moved for a new trial, on the same ground.
    Wilson, for the motion;
    Eggleston, contra.
    
   Colcock, J.

delivered the opinion df the Court.

The objection taken cannot avail the defendant. It has long been the practice in the Courts of this State to conduct causes, and to obtain judgments, without any regular warrant of attorney. I have no doubt, that a case may occur in which it would be proper to call for it. As for instance, on proof that an attorney was proceeding without authority, for the mere purpose of oppression, or for any other sinister purpose, the Court, in the exercise of its discretion, would call on the attorney to produce his authority.

Johnson, J. and Richardson, J. concurred.

Motion refused.-