Mehaffy v. Share ex rel. Hains
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal from the Circuit Court, held by Kennedy, J. for Lancaster county. Tire action was assumpsit for money paid, and expended, lent and advanced, by Henry Share, for the defendant, James Me-haffy.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court, held by Kennedy, J. for Lancaster county. Tire action was assumpsit for money paid, and expended, lent and advanced, by Henry Share, for the defendant, James Me-haffy. The suit was brought for- the use of Henry Hains, whose right to sue, formed the principal ground of controversy in the «au'se. .The .pleadings which are- material to the understanding of the cause, were as follows: “And the said James Mehaffy, in his own proper person, comes and defends the wrong and injury, &c. and says, “that before and at the time of issuing the summons in this case, and of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
HustoN, J.
--The defendant appeared, prayed oyer of the writ, *376and of Henry Hains’ power to sue, and special imparlance; and a rule was granted on plaintiff’s attorney to filG his warrant of attorney, and he filed it. This may seem strange to those in other states, but in fact occurs so seldom, that many lawyers in full practice, for a long time, never had, and never have been called on to file a warrant of attorney. The client spealis, or writes to the lawyer, and gives him a fee, and he attends to the matter. After oyer, defendant pleaded in abatement.
A…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Donley v. HaysSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1828
- Richardson v. lessee of StewartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1815
3Cited by1 opinion
- Reber v. GundyDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1882