Case Name: JAMES TOMPKINS v. GEORGE MANNER, et al.
Court: New York Superior Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1884-03-03
Citations: 18 Jones & S. 511
Docket Number: 
Parties: JAMES TOMPKINS v. GEORGE MANNER, et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Superior Court of the city of New York
Volume: 50
Pages: 511–512

Head Matter:
JAMES TOMPKINS v. GEORGE MANNER, et al.
Decided March 3, 1884.
Costs—right of attorney to judgment for—vacating satisfaction of judgment.
Before Sedgwick, Ch. J., Truax, and O’Gorman, JJ.
Appeal from an order, of the special term made October 31, 1883, vacating the satisfaction of the judgment entered herein in favor of defendants, and giving the attorney for the defendants leave to issue execution thereon.
The moving papers showed the facts to be as follows: On January 20, 1879, judgment was entered herein in favor of defendants and against the plaintiff for - the sum of §122.59, which judgment was entirely for costs. On February 25, 1879, the judgment was docketed in New York county, and an execution issued thereon against the property of plaintiff and returned unsatisfied. In January, 1882, an execution was issued against the person of plaintiff, and on January 20, 1882, he was admitted to the liberties of the jail. By instrument dated January 25, 1882, purporting to have been executed in Dallas county, Texas, on December 1, 1882, the defendants assigned said judgment to William P. Tompkins. This assignment was filed in the office of the clerk of this court December 13, 1882. On December 12, 1882, on plaintiff’s application, and on consent of said William P. Tompkins, an order was entered discharging plaintiff from the custody of the sheriff under said execution, and directing that the bond given for the liberties of the jail be canceled, and plaintiff was accordingly discharged on December 20, 1882, the judgment was satisfied of record. The assignment and satisfaction of the judgment were without the knowledge or consent of defendants attorney, who never received anything on account of the judgment.
A motion was thereupon made by defendant’s attorney in person to vacate the satisfaction, and for leave to issue execution, which motion was granted, and from the order entered thereon the plaintiff has appealed. No notice of this motion was given to the assignee.
Edward S. Clinch, for appellant.
A. J. Rogers, for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Order affirmed, with $10 costs, and disbursements to be taxed.