Tullock v. Cunningham
New York Supreme Court
Oil certiorari to a Justice’s Court. Debt, in the Couix below, on a Justice’s judgment, for $26,06, by Cunningham against Tullock.
Read the full summary
Oil certiorari to a Justice’s Court. Debt, in the Couix below, on a Justice’s judgment, for $26,06, by Cunningham against Tullock. Mr. Crookshank, áttorney at law,- appeared for the plaintiff; His authority being called for by the defendant, he admitted that he had no written power, but sta- • ■ r ted, under oath, that he was authorized and employed by the plaintiff to attend to this suit.- The Justice decided that this was sufficient; An execution had been issued upon tho judgment, and a carriage of the defendant sold under it for an
1Opinion of the Court
Curia*
The authority of an attorney, who appears either fof a plaintiff or defendant, before a Justice, must be proved. But a parol authority is sufficient; and the attorney himself. is competent to prove it. The defendant below could not avaü himself of any declaration made by the plaintiff to the J i . Constable in relation to the execution. Even, admitting that j ha¿ told the Constable he must have the carriage hid in for him, and he would take it in satisfaction of the execution, R would be no defence in this suit, provided the sale was fairly conducted. If the Constable, in consequence of…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Mobile Transportation Co. v. City of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1900
- Cotton v. HillerMississippi Supreme Court · 1876
- Hirshfield v. LandmanNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1854
- Rickey v. ChristieNew York Supreme Court · 1886