Case Name: GLENNIE ROOT, by JENNIE ROOT, her Guardian ad litem, Appellant, v. J. R. VAN DUZEN and Others, Respondents; JENNIE ROOT, Appellant, v. J. R. VAN DUZEN and Others, Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1884-02
Citations: 39 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 63
Docket Number: 
Parties: GLENNIE ROOT, by JENNIE ROOT, her Guardian ad litem, Appellant, v. J. R. VAN DUZEN and Others, Respondents. JENNIE ROOT, Appellant, v. J. R. VAN DUZEN and Others, Respondents.
Judges: Present — BarNArd, P. J., Dykman and Pratt, JJ.
Reporter: Supreme Court Reports (Hun)
Volume: 39
Pages: 63–64

Head Matter:
GLENNIE ROOT, by JENNIE ROOT, her Guardian ad litem, Appellant, v. J. R. VAN DUZEN and Others, Respondents. JENNIE ROOT, Appellant, v. J. R. VAN DUZEN and Others, Respondents.
Action — in the absence of fraud and collusion it may be settled by the parties withowi;' the consent of their attorneys.
Appeals from orders made at a Special Term, denying motions-to vacate orders discontinuing the above entitled actions in so far as-they affect the rights of the plaintiff’s attorneys.
Tbe court at General Term said: “ These actions were commenced •for the recovery of damages for the wrongful conversion of personal ■ property, and they were both settled by the parties before the service ■ of answer in either. Now the attorney for the plaintiff in both cases desires to proceed with the actions, notwithstanding such settlement, because it was made without his concurrence. There is no proof that these settlements were collusive or fraudulent as against the attorney for the plaintiff, but on the contrary it plainly appears that they were very proper and mutually satisfactory to the parties.
“ In the case of Roberts v. Doty (31 Hun, 128) it was decided at • the last General Term of this court in our district that parties to an . action may settle and adjust the same without' the intervention of their attorneys in the absence of fraud or collusion. This court is, .•therefore, committed to that doctrine.”
William T. O’ Neill, for the appellant.
T. A. Reed, for the respondents.

Opinion:
Opinion by
Dykman, J.
Present — BarNArd, P. J., Dykman and Pratt, JJ.
Orders affirmed, with costs, to be paid by plaintiff's attorney •- personally.