The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-10-19
SWEETSER PAYS TWO DEBTS.
OLD JUDGMENTS AGAINST MAGTS-
TRATE JUST NOV SATISFIED.

One That Needed No satisfaction Piece. for
n Was PAID nder order OF supreme
court and Covered Money collected
for a client More Than a Year Before.
Since the ist Of Judgments on record
In the County Clerks Office against Magis-
trste Sweetser was published on Monday
last thelis has dwindled The Lar Journdtof
October II shows that the Magistrate has
fled q satisfaction for the claim NJ j. Mac
donald for Sl32 "a Tho date Of record pm
the Judgment IL October %, 1910 The
same paper. on October Is. records another
satisfaction of = Judgment by the Magis-
trate. II was for SO y. and was occurred by
J. J. Conklin IN April 4, 1901.
One judgment, which stood against
Magistrate SweetAer for sone time, needs
no satisfaction piece for he settled after a
Supreme Court Judge had signed an order
commanding him 10 do an. " was 10 pay a
client part Of money Sweetser had collected
for him a. an attorney he finally did pay.
but not 10 the now attorney the client had
secured ~ effect q settlement. He paid the
client himself. The second attorney was
ont the money he had paid for costs in an
effort to compel Sweetser to comply with
the Supreme Court Judges order.
VII EFPNCbl''l ' W. ''l't~
sweeper in the employ If the city. was run
down and 30 injured 10y a delivery wagon
OF a hardv are firm on West Forty-second
street that he went ~ the hospital for
several days. Smith was 10 years nd and
lived at 100 Amsterdam avenue, He had
been a street sweeper for eight years, He
was in John 3. Sections district and acknowl-
edged political allegianCe 10 him,
After Smith got out of the hospital he
looked around for a lawyer to press a claim
against the hardware firm for his injuries
and was recommended to S~eetser, who
was regarded as a useful man for the dis
trict machine. and whose abilities were
valued highly because he was able to draw
up resolutions and 10 -ee that documents
put out were in good English. Sweetser's
Office was then at lf9 Broadway. He
made a settlement with the hardw are firm
and received t225, but Smith didn't get
any Of it. He applied to Sweetser from
time to time for what was coming to him
and was put of. His patience was eX-
hausted. and he finally went TO Franklin j.
Bischoff. W DO agreed to see what he could
do about getting the money for Smith.
Blschof had no SUCCESS and decided to
sue. The complaint IN the case reCiteS
that Sweetser obtained $225 for his client
Smith and adds.
mo part Of which he has ever paid TO
your petitioner, although the same has
been repeatedly demanded by your petit
TONER. since the said Sweetser received the
same, which was in or about the month of
December, 1899.
The suit was heard on July 10, 1900, in
the Tenth district Municipal Court.
Sweetser put in a CounterClaim for Sl52. 50
for legal services 10 Smith. and Judgment
was given 10 Smith for S62 80 with costs,
which brought the amount up 10 S7s.17.
Bischof could not collect, Swcetser making
repeated promises 10 pay. No execution
was issued because Of these promises.
No money came in, however. Smith was
despairing Of getting any Of the money
and he went TO ex-senator George F. Lang
helm with his story.
Mr.. Langbein took up the matter at once.
On September II Of that year he drew up a
petition 10 the Supreme Court and went
before Justice Abram X. Lawrence, asking
that Sweetser As an attorney and as an off,
Ger Of the court be compelled to pay over
the money due Smith forthwith" The
next day he notified Sweetser and told him
that the order was r~eturnable on Septem-
her p. Sweetser came to see Langbein
on September % and agreed to pay s25 on
account and asked for an adjournment of
the case to October ?. Langbein consented
TO the adjournment but did not get the
S25. When the case came up on October
? Sweetser did not appear and the order
was signed by Justice Lawrence by de-
fault. The order read:
Ordered that such motion be granted
and is hereby granted and that the said
William A. SweetseT, an attorney and
counsellor at law of the Supreme Court of
the State OF New York, shall forthwith pay
to Thomas Smith or 10 George +. Langbein,
as attorney for said Thomas Smith, the
sum Of of SSH together with the interest
thereon from August n, 1900, together with
$40 costs of this action"
The order was filed on October ) and
served on Sweetser the next day. Langbein
made repeated efforts TO get Sweetser to
pay the money and was about to draw
up attachment papers for contempt. When
he called on Smith 10 sign the necessary
affidavits smith said that Sweetser had
settled the case with him. Smith was sick
OF having and he declared that he was too
good an organization man 10 fight the case
further. He was satisfied with what
Sweetser had paid him. When Langbeln
asked for reimbursemen for the money
he had spent in costs and pay for his SER
vices Smith said that he might sue the
city, because Smith was an employee of
the city and the city ought 10 supply coun-
sci for it's employees hurt in the line of their
duty. Langbein dropped the matter right
there.
The judgment Of Thomas Smith, street
sweeper. against William A. Sweetser is
therefore wiped out, AZ ave been the
Macdonald and Conklm judgments.