The Express.
London, England, 1859-05-03 00:00:00

LAW lITTELLIG
(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF QUERN'S I
Sittings In Br
Irk, .13eca• Lord Cu
Crompton, odd H
PAT V. YOULIB.--ATTOINETiI
TM. a rill °la%
rsbizola q
ue
of &hornet. the conduct SUit
oTi:hieloingazitchepithatinierioirniptt,i;:b:E..tfolfra.sugbrinertitoik.at Ipyziebsdort.inediad.y:raghttdi
for slander; sad the dechustion alleged
without the authority or omens,
and directions of the plaintiff, entered
with the attoraoys on the other side to
plaintiff for a oertain sum, and to et
whereby she was prevented bringing
the Collets' of Zeeland. The d*u
had acted in a eenecatable, carefal, es
In accordance with the edvios of count"
and the question now was whether
=wee to the action.
Mr. Kennedy' on the pert of the ph
it wee not, and that an attorney wa
directions of his client provided they we
involve anything derogatory to his p
He admitted that an attorney could exe
union in matters of procedure, but at
right to depart from the instructions he
conduct of a suit, unless with the cones
if he did so he most be made rapt
CONDOM
Mr. Jaya, on behalf of the defends
plea raised a good defense to the act
came on for trial It was no longer un
attorney, but was left entirely in the
authority, viz.—those of the counsel
with the:consent of the plaintiff ; and is
promise upon their dries, ha must b
acted the plaintiff's authority.
Lord Campbell was of opinion that t
eibly be defended as an answer to the
that the defendant entered into a comp
Lions contrary to the express direction.
then, by way of avoidance, end it w
advice of counsel, end was a prudent
meet for her in ill happen. He thong
defense to the action. If there had bet
on the part of the plaintiff forbidding
compromise, he would have a good
were such direWone, and ea they still
ia interim into the compromise, he
between the plaintiff and himself. Vi
still binding on the patties but, it
plaintiff to have the aresognisent fora
not agree to the general pond* laid
that the defendant was bound=
to her direction% however un
ever they might compromise his char
acted contrary to her positive instruct
Of a breach of duty which gave het
of action.
The other Judges being of the lam
The court gave judgment against t
of the phintiff.

COURT OF EXCH
Sitting is Banco.—(Before the L
Beams Martin, Bramwell, I
STILLWiLL V. RtCi-TRIVATS

T117.-Zw;i101);;41;tViii•
delindaat, a gentleman of property
board and lodging in the plaintiff's 1
is also a mows action brought by tin
plaintiff for false imprisonmenlebw
the asylum on the ground of
Mr. Edwin James, on behalf of hi
on application which he had previon
fendant should be permitted to loop
Honeyman did not oppose
mad of the costs of a similar one
after inspection.
Applioation granted socordiegly,

COURT OF PROBATE
(1146xe the Indp

The respondent, who is e woo
married the petitioner In 1850, an!
her. Doting the period of *MOM
paste hebite, end frequently beat
131 m separated from him in March I
Dr. Tristram was connsal for I
spondent did not appear.
Sir C. Cromwell granted the pm

Nltli AND NEWTON

This was an -ma-6.ga gait, aitis

late LYetmant.Colonel Butt,
Cheltenham on the Brat of 1
fife were hie executors; the di
b.ir.et•law. The deceased 1
but had not had It attested. With
that he might acknowledge the int
but bdore he could do ea he been
afterwards died.

Yr. Power, Q.C., sad Dr. Spiral
tree; Dr. Deane, Q.C., and Dr. 81
Sir C. Croswell pronounoed ag
allowed the costa at the plaintiffs o