Majority
Order affirmed, with costs and disbursements.
Mem. by
The power of a court upon the request of a client to make an order substituting one attorney for another is undoubted, when such an order should he made upon the payment of the attorney’s costs, and when it may be made without providing for such payment, is discussed in The Matter of Prospect Avenue ( 85 Hun, 257 ). I agree with the conclusion arrived at there, and see no occasion for indulging in any further discussion of it. That decision covers the questions raised upon this appeal. The affidavits disclose a state-of facts which seem to me to be sufficient to have authorized the Special Term in making the order made in this case. A discussion of the facts will neither be of advantage to the cause of justice nor for the-benefit of the parties to this appeal. The order appealed from should be affirmed, with ten dollars-costs and disbursements.
Mayham, P. J., and Putnam. J., concurred.