New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-07-28

4
act Fat Rsilyyl.u q. Dried and l. 5.) IL wasf'rm-
ery held that An appearance by aa attorney TOT apy
without aut, ority was good leasiDg the party 70 MS
remedy aga ps the attorney for his damages lbsnoh
Rnt tho n,e ,r long ogo modified 80 as t. give
hef to I'd Marty il the attorney was not fully able To
responS, in dsnsaees. And in Denton agt. Soyes, Cb
j. Kent said he willing ID go free then and in
ever such case TO let the defendant in 10 defense.
l. Meacham agt. Dudiy, Wend., 5l4 the rule was
SCI led that the Court would relieve party If his stor-
" was not respoBsibe and il he was able TO ccnpen'
.l;e in damages the rule still remained. Adams az.
Gilbert Wen, 400. Campbell agt Bristol, ~ Wend',
l0l Later than these cas7s, sti greater dbpost)n
has prevailed among the judges 20 relieve party fron
the Unauthorized acts Of the attorney. In the Enghsn
courts these views TO relieving parties new prev NJ
In Bsgy agt. Buckland. Dow and L1aFnd, 10 ny, ,
Court say: Z" We are disposed 10 lay down d az
ferent rule and TO conne the liability OF the deenadnt
10 cases in which the course Of proceedings bad gwen
him notice of the action. If the plaintiff with put ssIs
ing the defendant with process accept the W.
of AN unar horned attorney for the defeodan ne no
wholly free from the impntation of negligence or he
law requires him to give notice to the defendant oy
aervipg the writ, and he has not done 80. .
Rut while the Attorney has all the authofly heee5-
saTy for the conduct of the management OF the aeAon
and for the collection of the debt any, his powers -
no further He has further or greater ai'horrty,
even if he thinks il for the benefit OF me- cneni
he cannot bind his client 10 an appeal oohd ai1n'gn
ne thinks il for lis clients interest 10 appear: A
narte HoIbrook, Cowen, - He has no rSh1 70
make compromise for his client. tttocker ee az ag
Parker, Cranch 1876; NolaS agt. Jackson IU!u, nep
4521 He cannot release the interest OF a WNnes on
the trial lMung aRt House, III j. X. 4o4 lie can
not discharge the debt for less sum tnan ,ne aponns
recovered. Same agt. Carnage. Plck. of; trump
agt Challis Dowl d l.. 49, He cannot COMPROMISE
and discontinue suit brought for land OF big clients IN
consideration of a conveyance of parts TO him flny
agt Miller, % p. 5. Rep, 264l.
lie cannot purchase land s1ld nnder an ehecui sn
issned in the cause for the benefit Of and trusted Tor
his client (Beardsley agt. Root, III J H., 4oal ne
has no authority discharge the defendant from Gus
tody on any execution without receiving payment
lSimonton agt. Banell, Il Wendell 3o'.)
In Turbine agt Cotton, Stockton h. q, the Chan
celor of Newjersey says 81 think that the Solicitor
had not the power enter into agreement by when
the lien of his client postponed to a subsequent
incumbrance Toe authorities are numerous and very
uniform against the authority OF an attorney TO enter
mo an argument of this kind without being author
led" (See also Williams agt. Smith, DOW. m
Cas-. 632; Hubbard agt. Phillips, IL NJ. II W., w.
In Howe agt Lawrence, ID Zabriskie, New.Jersey
Rep p. 49, it was held that such an agreement maze
by an attorney or counsel of matters no; necessarily
Connected with the conducting Of the CASE would no'
be sustained.
The stipulaions in that case were somewha, Of the
same character those in this case excepting mat Inc
intent allow another tra! lnste ad OF preventing
any review by the higher Court.
The Chief Justee, in describing the stipuanons,
ssys the stipuatons were that all necessary papers
sboud be fled out of time that sl irregularities Ia the
should be entered in the a. were entered III that
and other provisions were made after Judgment wac
entered and in expressing his opinion or the validity
of the stipulation, he says; The stipulation 70 wave
of the cause it was deliberate surrender Of his
clients rights a surrender which consider The coun.
eel A" had no power to make and which If he had
the power, justice would never permit NIT, 10
the agreement must have been entered into
BY the COUNSEL OF the defendant. under some mis-
apprehension Of lie character in which event 1t is not
his agreement il must have been founded on some
corrupt considerations in which event il is utterly void.
The high character of the counsel forbds the npua-
ton OF fraud or corruption. The alternative remaes
that the agreement was entered into under some mis-
take or mlsapprehenson ana ought not 10 DC eiof
| by the Courts
In Pike AIT. Emerson, 5 New. Hampshire Rep, D..
33 contrary opinion 70 have been entertained
an appeal and the Court held that while sCh stipu.
ation existed they would grant motion to dlsmiss the
appeal.
effect of that decision that the party must hrs
move to set ABIDE the stipuaOn If there any rel
son why it should not be held valid before he could
bring the appeal The Judge says; "lhe Court has
the power, without" doubt in ease Of fraud or m's-
take 20 'reeve party from the effects OF such an
agreement, but while the agreement remains unm-
peached, no appeal can be prosecuted"
The rule confirming relief TO the client only to cases
of the insolvency of the attorney, has nearly II not en-
lief to the party where the act was authorized. In
Sharp agt. The Mayor, &C., Justice Muln says;
The recent and in my opinion the more Just pracuce
is for the Court 10 relieve the client, without reference
to the responsibility of the attorney where proper
case for granting relief is established There is no jus
tce in permitting party 10 obtain an undue advan
age another through the neglect or misconduct OF
that other attorney Courts of a~ are not 70 be used
by parties in periectng through the iorms oil law the
ruin of party who has employeda negligent or I'M
worthy counsel"
And in New-York Ch R., p. 5i4, it is said: &C The
law Will permit attorney, through that relation
10 make contract relative TO the property IN ltga-
ton TO the disadvantage Of his client.
From these and other cases which might be cited, il
| can easily be seen what the duty and author,
| ity of the attorney Is. lie is vested with all
| necessary power and authority for the manage
| ment Of the intrused to him, and for
carving into effect the orders and Judgments of the
Court If he enters into stipulations pertinent TO the
matter inrusted TO him he thereby bind his Client
If in such matters he acts without special authority
the Court will still enforce HE acts against hls client
in the particular business of his employ II IN 80
doing his client seriously damaged and he IS unable
TO respond in damages the Court Will relieve the party
injured preserving the other party from loss
But bis acts done outside of the matter con mted 70
his charge are not binding and when he undertakes 70
bind his lent by stipuateg as TO matters not con-
pected with the action such agreements are not bind
ipo In the present hardly be necessary TO
ask for evidence that the attorney cannot respond 10
damages to the city, if the result of these spulaions
should deprive the city of its property.
The value of the property is estimated at millions,
ana no cent shoud be required TO seek for redress 20
such an extent solely against his attorney but shond
be relieved by the Court from tie danger OF ioss 50 lar
as 10 protect his rights in the action.
in this case the attorney is the Corporation Council
elected by the people, and intrusted by sta ute with
the management OF the legal business Of the city; and
the inquiry + pertinent 70 ts case who ~ hns III.
clients than those connected with the ordinary rea-
tons OF attorney and counsel.