TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Colton v. Oshrin

John Colton v. Harry H. Oshrin

Colton v. Oshrin, 155 Misc. 383 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1934)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Supreme Court · State Trial Courts
Decided
November 28, 1934
Judges
Hofstadter
Citations
155 Misc. 383278 N.Y.S. 1461934 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1959

Opinion of the Court — Hofstadter

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Hofstadter, J.

Despite my specific direction that Mr. Weiss appear before the court, he failed to put in an appearance. This significant circumstance, in conjunction with the matters set forth in the motion papers, compels the conclusion that Mr. Weiss is not an attorney and counselor at law, duly admitted ta practice in the courts of this State, and never has been.

*384 In view of this conclusion, it follows that all the proceedings had are nugatory and void. (Penal Law, §§ 271, 272; Kaplan v. Berman, 37 Misc. 502 ; People v. James, 150 id. 390, 393; Newburger v. Campbell, 9 Daly, 102 ; Puma v. McGonigle, 73 Misc. 35 .)

It is not suggested that the defendant or his attorney of record was aware of the facts with reference to Mr. Weiss, nor is it especially important that the objection was not raised by plaintiff’s counsel sooner. The result is the same. The cases above cited presumably are based on the theory that it would be subversive of the correct administration of justice and of our courts to permit unauthorized persons to practice as attorneys therein. It is, therefore, not a matter of penalizing any one (other than the person guilty of the offense), but, rather, a matter of vindicating the dignity of the court and of an honorable profession that the rule has been established that all proceedings participated in by such an unauthorized person are rendered nugatory and ineffectual. In this view, therefore, actual prejudice to any party need not be shown, but is conclusively presumed.

The motion for a mistrial is, therefore, granted, and a new trial is ordered. The case is restored to the calendar of Special Term, for Trials, at Trial Term, Part II, for the 3d day of December, 1934. Order signed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1941: 11973: 21977: 11992: 12011: 119412026peak 1973 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. McKenzie v. Burris500 S.W.2d 357 (Ark. 1973)
  2. Schifrin v. Chenille Mfg. Co.117 F.2d 92 (2d Cir. 1941)
  3. American Express Travel Related Services Co. v. Chandler (In re Chandler)139 B.R. 817 (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 1992)
  4. State ex rel. Mather v. Carnes551 S.W.2d 272 (Mo. Ct. App. 1977)
  5. Dunn v. Eickhoff43 A.D.2d 580 (1973) · Concurrence
  6. Parkchester Preservation Co. v. Feldeine31 Misc. 3d 859 (N.Y. City Civ. Ct. 2011)

Most recent

  1. Parkchester Preservation Co. v. Feldeine31 Misc. 3d 859 (N.Y. City Civ. Ct. 2011)
  2. American Express Travel Related Services Co. v. Chandler (In re Chandler)139 B.R. 817 (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 1992)
  3. State ex rel. Mather v. Carnes551 S.W.2d 272 (Mo. Ct. App. 1977)
  4. Dunn v. Eickhoff43 A.D.2d 580 (1973) · Concurrence
  5. McKenzie v. Burris500 S.W.2d 357 (Ark. 1973)
  6. Schifrin v. Chenille Mfg. Co.117 F.2d 92 (2d Cir. 1941)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Newburger v. Campbell, 9 Daly 102 (1880) 10
Kaplan v. Berman, 37 Misc. 502 (1902) 8
Puma v. McGonigle, 73 Misc. 35 (1911) 2

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list