People v. Bradt
New York Supreme Court
THE defendant was brought up on an attachme~it, fQr non-payment of the costs in several actions of ej ectment, in which he was a lessor, at the last Augzt~t term, (6 johns.
Read the full summary
THE defendant was brought up on an attachme~it, fQr non-payment of the costs in several actions of ej ectment, in which he was a lessor, at the last Augzt~t term, (6 johns. Rep. 318.) and was then discharged, on his affidavit, That he had no interest in the premises mentioned in the actions of ejectment, and that he had never consented to •become a lessor; and the court granted a rule against the attorneys of the plaintiff, to show cause, at the last term, why an attachment should not issue against them, for the costs. At the last term, the attorneys showed cause, by affidavits, which stated…
1Per curiam
The . court cannot receive the defendant’s denial of his consent to have his. name used, in the . actions of ejectment, as a bar to the process. If the, fact be as he states it, he has his remedy over against the attorneys of the plaintiff in those suits. The court, cannot judge between the contradictory affidavits of the party and the attorneys. The-defendant in those suits must have his costs; and is not to lose them in consequence of the denial of the lessor and his attorneys, of any responsibility. ~. It is enough for the court that Bradt appears as a party to the record; and he confesses…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Davidson v. DallasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- Glidden v. Doe ex dem. AndrewsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
- Hallett v. HastieSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
- Society for the Propagation of the Gospel v. HartlandU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1874