Adams v. . the Fort Plain Bank

(dissenting). — The objection made by the Plaintiff to the evidence offered by the Defendants, that he was an attorney and counsellor-at-law at the time of the assignment to him of the demands in suit, was properly overruled. It was competent to the Defendants to show that the Plaintiff had purchased the demands, contrary to the statute forbidding attorneys, &c., from buying choses in action, for the purpose of bringing suits thereon (2 R. S. 288, 1st ed.). The fact that Plaintiff was such attorney and counsellor would not, of itself, show that the demands were purchased in contravention of…