Newlin v. Newlin
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. ERROR to the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware county, in a suit brought by Samuel Newlin the plaintiff below, and defendant in error, against Nathaniel Newlin, the defendant below. • On the trial of the cause in the Court below, the dant offered in evidence a deposition taken under a rule of Court on the 23d March, 1820, before a Justice of the Peace of Chester county; and proved that notice of the time and place of taking the deposition had been served on William…
Read the full summary
In Error. ERROR to the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware county, in a suit brought by Samuel Newlin the plaintiff below, and defendant in error, against Nathaniel Newlin, the defendant below. • On the trial of the cause in the Court below, the dant offered in evidence a deposition taken under a rule of Court on the 23d March, 1820, before a Justice of the Peace of Chester county; and proved that notice of the time and place of taking the deposition had been served on William Graham, esquire, the plaintiff’s attorney in the cause, on the 17th March preceding, when he was sick, who made no…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Gibson J.
According to our practice, service of notice on the attorney, is held insufficient in the case of depositions, only where the attorney has objected at the time of the service. To be exempt from the trouble and responsibility of transmitting the notice to his client, is a personal privilege, which, if he please, he may waive ; and he does tacitly waive it by not objecting: otherwise the adverse party might be taken by surprise. The silence of the attorney therefore is equivalent to an agreement; which will bind his client. But here the case is…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Cunningham v. JordanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1845
- Gracy v. BaileeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1827