Gilbert v. Vanderpool & Beekman
New York Supreme Court
IN ERROR, on certiorari to a justice’s court. * e The defendants in error brought an action in the court . ♦ . 0 below against the plaintiff m error, who was an attorney of this court, The summons was issued during the term of this court, and was returnable on a day subsequent to the la$t day of term.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR, on certiorari to a justice’s court. * e The defendants in error brought an action in the court . ♦ . 0 below against the plaintiff m error, who was an attorney of this court, The summons was issued during the term of this court, and was returnable on a day subsequent to the la$t day of term. On the return of the summons, the par^es aPPeal'ed, and the defendant pleaded that he was an attorney of the supreme court, which was sitting at the time the summons was issued and served, and claimed his exempe r tian under the proviso in the 8th section of the act concerning costs, (I N. R.…
1Opinion of the CourtPlatt, J.
Two questions are presented for our consideration in this case: 1. Whether the defendant below was entitled to exemption from this suit upon the facts stated in his plea: and 2. Whether the justice was bound to receive or notice the plea in abatement without affidavit of its truth.
On the first question we are of opinion that, according to the true construction of the 8th section of the act concerning costs, an attorney or counsellor of any court of record is exempt from the service of process issued out of a justice’s court, during the sitting of the court, of which he is an attorney or…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Juneau Bank v. McSpedanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Wisconsin · 1860
- Chubbuck v. ClevelandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Larned v. GriffinU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1882
- Hoffman v. Bay Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
- National Press Intelligence Co. v. BrookeCity of New York Municipal Court · 1896