From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

LEEF v. NASSAU ELECTRIC RAILROAD COMPANY

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1899
40 App. Div. 619 (N.Y. App. Div. 1899)

Opinion

May Term, 1899.


The defendant should not be precluded from setting up the release executed by the plaintiff as against the cause of action so far as the plaintiff personally is concerned. The remedy of the attorney for the plaintiff is to apply for leave to prosecute the action in his own behalf to secure his compensation. ( Randall v. Van Wagenen, 115 N.Y. 527.) In case the action is so prosecuted, the release, if made in fraud of the attorney's right, can be no bar to his claim. Order affirmed, without costs, and without prejudice to an application by the plaintiff's attorney for leave to prosecute the suit in his own behalf. All concurred.


Summaries of

LEEF v. NASSAU ELECTRIC RAILROAD COMPANY

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1899
40 App. Div. 619 (N.Y. App. Div. 1899)
Case details for

LEEF v. NASSAU ELECTRIC RAILROAD COMPANY

Case Details

Full title:Charles Leef, by his Guardian ad Litem, Joseph Leef, Appellant, v. Nassau…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 1, 1899

Citations

40 App. Div. 619 (N.Y. App. Div. 1899)