Legal Opinion
Beaver v. Van Every
New York Supreme Court
Decided October 15, 1823PublishedCited by 3 opinions
On certiorari to a Justice’s Court. The Justice permit-ed one Heermance to appear for Tan Every, who was the plaintiff below. When this was objected to by the defendant, the Justice stated that the plaintiff, being sick and unable to attend himself, had sent for him the day before-, and requested him to permit Heermance to appear for him cn ^ trjal. He accordingly admitted' him without any evidence of his authority, and gave judgment for the plaintiff
1Opinion of the Court
Curia.
The Justice had no right to decide from his own knowledge. He should have required the usual proof of an authority to appear. (Burlingham v. Deyer, 2 John. Rep. 189. Rosekrans v. Van Antwerp, 4 id. 228.)
Judgment reversed.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Burlingham v. DeyerNew York Supreme Court · 1807
3Cited by3 opinions
- Barnes v. Sutliff, New York County Courts1898
- Hirshfield v. LandmanNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1854
- Rickey v. ChristieNew York Supreme Court · 1886