Case Name: John Sexton against The President and Trustees of the Pennsylvania and New Jersey Steamboat Company
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1824-05
Citations: 7 N.J.L. 169
Docket Number: 
Parties: *John Sexton against The President and Trustees of the Pennsylvania and New Jersey Steamboat Company.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 7
Pages: 204–206

Head Matter:
*John Sexton against The President and Trustees of the Pennsylvania and New Jersey Steamboat Company.
1. No person, unless it appear by the record that he is the attorney or party, or in some way connected with the cause, will be allowed to oppose a motion, or take any objection to the proceedings.
2. An attorney must first enter an appearance before he will be heard.
An order had been made at the last term, that the defendants should cause their appearance to be entered to the action on or before the first day of this term.
White now moved to lay before the court, affidavits to shew that the order had been duly published, according to the directions of the third section of the act for the relief of creditors against corporations, (Rev. Laws 611) that he might obtain thereon an order upon the clerk of the court to enter an appearance for the defendants, in pursuance of the said section.
JEwing rose to oppose the motion,
and to shew that the order for publication should never have been made.
White insisted,
that the gentleman had no right to oppose his motion without entering an appearance; that no person at the bar, unless he was the attorney on record, could oppose his motion.
Living observed,
suppose a su mmons had been served that was irregular, if the party comes in and enters an appearance, it cures the error in the proceeding; so, in this case, if he was compelled to enter an appearance, it would cure the very defect to which he meant to object; and that no person ought to be compelled to enter an appearance, if, by so doing the very objection which he designed to make was waived; that it was not necessary that an appearance should be entered before an objection could be taken to the proceedings, for any one, as amicus curiae, might inform the court of irregularity in their proceedings.
R. Stockton,
in reply, said, that the great object of this statute was to get these corporations into court; until this .statute, there was no way of bringing them into court if their officers chose to keep out of the reach of the sheriff. But it was evident, *in this case, that all the purposes of this act had been answered for here; the corporation had counsel in court to object to the proceedings; but no one had a right to object to any motion until he was regularly in court. The court would first compel him to enter an appearance before they would listen to him. If the error will be cured by the entry of the appearance, it is such a one as ought to be cured, and the court would order an appearance for the very purpose of curing it.
Note. — This case overruled in Skillman v. Coolbaugh, 4 Halst. 246.

Opinion:
Per Curiam,.
We think that á person has no right to come into court and make an argument without entering an appearance; because what is he? Oan the crier of the-court or a bystander come in and make an argument before the court? It must appear, by the record, that the person making the objection is either the attorney or party, or some•way connected with the cause : therefore the court refuse to hear any objection to Mr. White's motion until an appearance is entered.
Ewing entered his appearance, and then said, that as an appearance was now entered, there was no necessity for Mr, White's motion.