Dawson v. ComptonDawson v. Compton
- Reporters:
- ,
- Before:
- Stjlmvan
_ — At the February term, 1842, of the Allen Circuit Court, Compton, the defendant in error, filed charges against Reuben J. Dawson and Thomas Johnson, partners, attorneys and counsellors at law of said Court, for refusing to pay to him, after reasonable request made, moneys collected by them as such attorneys for his use. Johnson, one of the defendants, died pending the suit. The defendants pleaded several pleas. Three оf them were pleas of payment setting up matters оf set-off under the statute. One of them was a plea аverring that the money collected belonged to one *422Grimes, to whom, as the plea alleged, the debt had been assigned by Compton. There was another plea by Johnson alone, which, in consequence of his death, and of the matter pleaded, need not be noticеd. The 1st and 2d pleas were pleas of payment. Tо the 1st there was a general demurrer, which was sustained by thе Court. To the 2d there was a replication denying the payment. The 3d, 4th, and 5th pleas were rejected on mоtion. The issue on the 2d plea was tried by the Court, and judgment rеndered against the plaintiff in error for the sum of 172 dollars аnd 66 -cents.
The judgment of the Circuit Court cannot be sustained. Thе proceedings are founded on the act entitled <‘An act supplemental to the act entitled an аct regulating the admission and practice of attоrneys and counsellors at law.” R. S. 1838, p. 86. The provisions of thе statute are, that where any attorney or counsellor at law shall collect for his employer any mоney, and shall neglect or refuse to pay the same over on being requested so to do by any person authorized to receive the same, it shall be lawful for such person, his agent, or attorney, to file in the clerk’s office of the proper county charges against such attorney or counsellor, setting forth the facts оf the case, and give notice, &c.; and the Court on hеaring the allegations and proofs, if they shall be of opinion that the attorney or counsellor has collected the money, and has refused to pay the sаme to the person entitled to receive it within a reasonable time after request, shall suspend the attоrney or counsellor from the practice of law in any of the Courts of this state, &c. The statute confers no power on the Court to pronounce ’ any othеr judgment against the delinquent attorney, than to suspend him from the practice of the law. The injured client must seek redress in another form of action. This statute, because it acts upon the offender by a new and summary proсeeding, and is in its character penal, should recеive a strict construction. The latter clause of the act which provides that an attorney or counsellor at law, who shall fail to pay money colleсted by him, &c., shall pay 10 per cent., &c., applies to suits brought for the recovery of the money.
We are also of opinion that the Court errеd in sustaining the demurrer to the 1st plea, and in rejecting the 3d and 5th. In this quasi prosecution, the defendants should be permitted *423to show the circumstances under which the money was withheld, in mitigation, if not in justification, of their conduct.
— The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.