38 How. Pr. 121 | The Superior Court of New York City | 1869
The authority of Mr. Philip, in this1 action as attorney for the defendant ceased on the entry of the judgment; and therefore defendant was at liberty to employ any other attorney to take such action in relation to the judgment and cause as he desired, without any order of substitution. The motion for substitution is therefore unneccessary, and for that reason is denied. If it is designed to obtain possession of papers now in Mr. Phillips hands, that must be done by an indepennant proceeding against him.
From the papers used on the motion, I think defendant derived the impression from his conversation with plaintiff ’s friends that this action so far as the action itself was concerned was abandoned and that there was no néccessity ior further attention to it. The defualt then was taken through the excusable neglect of the defendant.