Majority
p. 165Ray and others, executors of Ray, deceased v. Macomb. January 27. 1834.
Headnote
The Solicitor for a complainant should not be the Solicitor of a receiver in the cause.This was a mortgage case ; and a receiver had Been appointed.
He now petitioned that the tenants attorn and the defendant furnish a rental, &c.; and the petition had the name of the same solicitor annexed to it as appeared for the complainants. An objection was taken to it on this ground; and Smith on Receivers, p. 25. 26. was referred to.
Mr. William H. Harison for the petitioner.
Mr. A. S. Garr in opposition.
I am inclined to uphold the objection taken to the motion. It is best for a receiver to employ any other solicitor than the one retained by the complainants ; but, as the point of practice is new in otir courts, let the motion be denied without costs.