Unknown County MsArchives Court.....Lombard, Vs Whiting & Lewis 1834
************************************************
Copyright.  All rights reserved.
http://www.usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm
http://www.usgwarchives.net/ms/msfiles.htm
************************************************

File contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by:
Deb Haines http://www.genrecords.net/emailregistry/vols/00003.html#0000719 June 2, 2008, 10:44 pm

Source: Reports Of Cases - Mississippi
Written: 1834

June Term 1826.

JOHN LOMBARD, vs. WHITING & LEWIS. 

Summary remedies given by statute, cannot be extended beyond the letter of the 
law.

OPINION OF THE COURT — by the Hon. JOHN BLACK. 

This is a summary proceeding under the 9th section of the act concerning 
counsellors and attorneys at law, Rev. Code, p. 246, against the defendants, 
for failing, as attorneys at law, to pay over monies by them collected for 
plaintiff, on a demand in his favor against Williams, Morton, el. al.

It appears from the agreed statement of facts, that the def'ts., Messrs. 
Whiting and Lewis, compromised the above mentioned claim of the plaintiff, on 
Williams, Morton, &c., entrusted to them for collection as attorneys at law, 
and received from Morton six hundred dollars in full of the demand, and 
executed a receipt to him, discharging him from all further liability, the 
amount due to the plaintiff being considerably more and that this was done 
without any express authority from the plaintiff.

This being a summary remedy, given by statute, cannot be extended beyond the 
express letter. We are clearly of opinion that an attorney cannot be charged 
in this mode of proceeding, for any misfeasance. And if the plaintiff has any 
ground of complaint, for an injury sustained by the compromise, he must resort 
to his action on the case. The defendants having received the sum of six 
hundred dollars, the court below decided correctly, in rendering judgment 
against them,deducting from that sum, the usual fees for collection.

The judgment must therefore be affirmed, with ten per cent damages.

Judge Child concurred.

D. S. & R. J. Walker, for defendant.

Griffith & Quitman, for plaintiff.

Note — In the above case, Messrs Whiting and Lewis considering a compromis-
judicious, had received a part of their client's claim, and gave a receipt in 
full, and had tendered the amount collected to their client, but demanded at 
the same time, a receipt in full, which was refused.

Additional Comments:
Reports of Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court of Mississippi; 1818 - 1832; 
By R. J. Walker, Reporter of the State. Natchez: Printed at the Courier and 
Journal Office, 1834.

File at: http://files.usgwarchives.net/ms/unknown/court/lombard108gwl.txt

This file has been created by a form at http://www.genrecords.org/msfiles/

File size: 2.8 Kb