Camp & Ball v. Bennett
New York Supreme Court
Bennett sued Camp and Ball in a justice’s court in trespass de bonis asportatis, the defendants appeared and pleaded, the cause was tried by a jury, and the defendants obtained a verdict.
Read the full summary
Bennett sued Camp and Ball in a justice’s court in trespass de bonis asportatis, the defendants appeared and pleaded, the cause was tried by a jury, and the defendants obtained a verdict. The plaintiff removed the case by certiorari into the Oneida common pleas, where the judgment rendered by the justice on the verdict was reversed, on the ground that the plaintiff on the trial in the justice’s court had shown a clear and conclusive right to recover, although he had shown himself entitled to nominal damages only. In the common pleas the defendants appeared by attorney, and after reversal of…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The question presented by the demurrer is, whether it is ground of error for an infant defendant to appear by attorney? Upon that general question the course of decision and of practice has been uniform. It has always been held that an infant under the age of twenty-one is incapable of appointing an attorney; and the practice has always been to appoint for him a guardian or prochien ami. If he appear by attorney it is error. Our revised statutes declare that such appearance by an infant shall not be a ground of reversing any judgment upon verdict, confession, default, nihil…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Sanders v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Holland v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1897
- Howard v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
- Fugate v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1904
- Smith v. KingsleyNew York Supreme Court · 1838
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.