New York Supreme Court, 1892

Bowen v. Smidt

Bowen v. Smidt
New York Supreme Court · Decided November 18, 1892 · Brunt
20 N.Y.S. 735; 49 N.Y. St. Rep. 647 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

James B. Reilly, for appellant. J. D. Hallen, for respondent.

Bowen v. Smidt

Opinion of the Court

Van Brunt, P. J.

Although it seems probable that the appellant owes the money in question, yet we do not think that the court should have made the order directing its payment to the respondent, in the face of the notice of the assignment of the claim given by the respondent and the claim made by the assignee. Such assignee seems to have the right to collect this money from the appellant, which he cannot do in a proceeding of this nature, as the relation of attorney and client has never existed between them. The order appealed from must be reversed, and the proceeding dismissed, with $10 costs and disbursements of the appeal. All concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.