Wheaton v. Newcombe
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeals by defendant from two orders denying motions made to compel the attorneys for.the plaintiff, as persons beneficially interested in the action, to pay a judgment for costs. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Freedman, J.
The appeals present the question whether Hart & Bamberger, the attorneys of record for the plaintiff, are liable to the defendant who *179recovered judgment, for the costs of the action on the ground that they were beneficially interested in the action by virtue of an agreement by which they were to have a portion of the recovery as compensation for their services. That under section 44, chapter X., title I., part III. of the Revised Statutes they would have been so liable, if both shared in the agreement, was expressly decided in Voorhis v. McCartney (51 N. Y. 387). In…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Muller v. . PondirNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Voorhees v. . McCartneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1873