Hudson v. Johnson
Court of Appeals of Virginia
This was an action of debt, instituted in foe County Court of Louisa, by the appellant, against the appellee. —=-PIea, payment.
Read the full summary
This was an action of debt, instituted in foe County Court of Louisa, by the appellant, against the appellee. —=-PIea, payment. At the trial, the plaintiff filed a demurrer to the evi•dence, stating, that the defendant offered in evidence to maintain the issue on his part, a receipt, bearing date long subsequent to this suit, given by John Lew* is, the attorney who prosecuted this action for the plaintiff, and amongst whose papers the bond, en which the suit was brought, was found 5 as also, that prior to the payment made by the said defendant to the said Lewis, on which account the said…
1Opinion of the Court
The President.
In general, payment to an attorney at law, is good on the custom of the country, particularly if he have possession of the specialty. Under particular circumstances this rule might not apply, as if notice were given that no such power was vested in the attorney. But in this case, the circumstances support the general principle ; for upon enquiry being made for the bond, the defendant was referred by the plaintiff to the attorney.
It was objected to the payment, that it was made after the action was brought.
It has always been the practice, and very properly so, to allow discounts…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Branch v. BurnleyCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1797