Platt v. JeromeAnnotate this Case
60 U.S. 384 (1856)
U.S. Supreme Court
Platt v. Jerome, 60 U.S. 19 How. 384 384 (1856)
Platt v. Jerome
60 U.S. (19 How.) 384
The competent parties to agree that a case shall be settled, and the writ of error dismissed are usually the parties upon the record. If either of them has assigned his interest, and it be made known to the court, the interest of such assignee would be protected.
But where there was a judgment for costs in the court below, and the attorney claimed to have a lien upon such judgment for his fees, it is not a sufficient reason for this Court to prevent the parties from agreeing to dismiss the case.
Mr. Collamer, counsel for the plaintiff in error, moved that the writ of error be dismissed, and in support thereof filed the following paper, viz.:
"This cause, which is now pending on writ of error from the United States Circuit Court of New York, is hereby settled and discontinued by mutual consent, each party to pay their own cost, and satisfaction is hereby acknowledged of all claims and demands between the parties hereto."
"Dated Waterbury, December 20, 1856."
"O. H. PLATT"
On the 24th of December, it was dismissed.
On the 9th of January, 1857, Mr. Foster counsel for Jerome, moved to set aside the order of dismissal and reinstate the case upon the docket upon the ground that the agreement to dismiss was made by the party himself when he was represented by counsel in court, and that Jerome had become insolvent, whereby all his interest, which was only for costs, had passed to this assignee. By dismissing the writ of error, the lien of defendant's counsel for fees, in this Court and in the court below, would be lost.