Coxe v. Nicholls
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
. Motion to set aside a judgment, entered September term 1798, in an amicable action in covenant, brought to December term 1797. The suit was founded on the guaranty of a bond, executed by James Wilson, esq.
Read the full summary
. Motion to set aside a judgment, entered September term 1798, in an amicable action in covenant, brought to December term 1797. The suit was founded on the guaranty of a bond, executed by James Wilson, esq. The bond was dated in 1796, payable on the 9th November 1797, and assigned by the defendant to the plaintiffs, on the 9th May 1796. The guaranty was dated on the 25th August 1796. The action was entered in pursuance of a written order to the prothonotary, subscribed by W. Tilghman, for the plaintiffs, and -by Joseph Thomas, for the defendant. The defendant made affidavit that he had never…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court.
The affidavits of either party are sufficient grounds for a rule to show cause, but are not competent evidence on the hearing. It is not the practice of Pennsylvania to file warrants of attorney. In general, the acts of an attorney bind his client, (1 Salk. 86, Carth. 412, 1 Dall. 164,)and it is of great consequence to society that the parties should not retract therefrom. Undoubtedly, the officers of the court are subjected to their control, and deeds of oppression will not receive their sanction.
What weighs with the court in this instance, is, that Thomas was generally viewed…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Rosenbaum v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
- Hageman v. SalisberrySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
- Rogers v. BurnsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1856
- Compher v. AnawaltSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
- Kissick v. HunterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.