Starr v. Vanderheyden
New York Supreme Court
MOTIONS were, made in behalf of the defendant, for relief against the judgments entered up by confession, on bonds and warrants of attorney in the above causes, and several others against the same defendant. The affidavits were numerous, and the grounds of relief suggested, various and special.
Read the full summary
MOTIONS were, made in behalf of the defendant, for relief against the judgments entered up by confession, on bonds and warrants of attorney in the above causes, and several others against the same defendant. The affidavits were numerous, and the grounds of relief suggested, various and special. It is necessary only to state, in regard to one point decided, and in order to show how far the court interferes to prevent any oppression on the part of attorneys, that in the above two causes, the plaintiffs were attorneys, and the defendant their client, and part of the demands for which the…
1Per curiam
The court, from general principles of policy and equity, will always look into the dealings between attorney and client, and guard the latter from any undue consequences resulting from a situation in which he may be supposed to stand une qual. The court acknowledge the justness and application of the doctrine laid down by Lord Loughborough, in Newman v. Payne. (2 Vesey, jun. 199.) The judgment obtained by an attorney from his client by confession, must only stand as a security, for what is actually due. In order to enforce this principle, without intending any censure upon the attorneys in…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Elmore v. JohnsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1892
- Brock v. BarnesNew York Supreme Court · 1863
- Barkley v. New York Centrall & Hudson River RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Harper v. PerrySupreme Court of Iowa · 1869
- Gruby v. SmithAppellate Court of Illinois · 1883
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.