Huston v. Mitchell
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. brought this action on the case in the Court of Common Pleas of Tioga count)1, against Richard Mitchell, the defendant in error, to recover the purchase money of a tract of land, sold, by the plaintiff to the defendant. At September Term, 1824, the plaintiff obtained a verdict for five hundred and ninety-two dollars, for which judgment was immediately entered.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. brought this action on the case in the Court of Common Pleas of Tioga count)1, against Richard Mitchell, the defendant in error, to recover the purchase money of a tract of land, sold, by the plaintiff to the defendant. At September Term, 1824, the plaintiff obtained a verdict for five hundred and ninety-two dollars, for which judgment was immediately entered. On the 17th of February, 1825, the defendant obtained a rule to show cause, .by the first day of May Term, why the judgment' should not be opened. On the 17th of May, 1825, on argument and affidavit filed, the court made an…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Tilghman, C. J.
Supposing Mr. Burnside to have been the plaintiff’s attorney on record, he would only have been authorized to do such things as pertained to the conducting of the suit. It is said, by Chief Justice Maeshall, who delivered the opinion of the court in Holker v. Parker, (7 Crunch, 452,) “that an attorney at law, merely as such, has, strictly speaking, no right to make a compromise,” but that he has a right to' enter- into a reference. The compromise, in that case, was, by the attorneys on both sides, eonsénting that the referees should make…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Dwight v. HazlettWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1929
- Catlin v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
- Millar v. CriswellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1846
- Naglee v. IngersollSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1847
- Gable v. HainSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1830
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.