TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Graves v. Graham

Thomas Graves v. Robert J. Graham

Graves v. Graham, 18 Misc. 600 (1896)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
City of New York Municipal Court · State Trial Courts
Decided
December 15, 1896
Judges
Dwyer
Citations
18 Misc. 60043 N.Y.S. 508
Headnotes
Attorneys — Authority — Appearance for special purpose. Where attorneys appear specially to.obtain an order, their relation with their client continues for the purpose of an appeal from that order.
Summary
Appeal from an order of the Special Term denying the. plaintiff’s motion to compel Messrs. Jones & Govin, attorneys for defendant, to accept notice of appeal.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Dwyer

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

O’Dwyer, J.

Admitting the respondent’s proposition that they appeared specially for the purpose of obtaining an order, vacating the service of the summons, and that that application having been decided they have no authority to act further, we are of the *601 opinion that the contention of these attorneys that after obtaining this order in their favor, they can withdraw so as to prevent an appeal from the order, would lead to the most palpable injustice. If this practice should be upheld, they can forever prevent an appeal from any order they have obtained or can obtain in this case, or they can appear specially in each instance, obtain an order and then withdraw.

Although it is sometimes said that the retainer of an attorney ends with the entry of the judgment, yet it is well settled that after judgment the attorney’s relations to his client continue in the matter for many purposes — he can issue execution, give satisfaction of the judgment and is the proper person on whom the defeated party should serve notice of appeal.

Likewise, where attorneys appear for a certain purpose, as it is claimed in this case, to obtain an order, their relation with their client still exists for the purpose of an appeal from .that order.

The order appealed from should be reversed, with costs to the appellant, and the motion granted, without costs.

Van Wtok, Ch. J., concurs.

Order reversed, with costs, and motion granted, without costs.

How later courts describe this case

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

1904: 11919: 119042026peak 1904 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Brown v. Arnold131 F. 723 (8th Cir. 1904)
  2. Boyle v. Waters173 N.W. 519 (Mich. 1919)

Most recent

  1. Boyle v. Waters173 N.W. 519 (Mich. 1919)
  2. Brown v. Arnold131 F. 723 (8th Cir. 1904)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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