Jeffrie vs. Joseph Robdoun
View original image: Page  101
[missing figure]

appearance by an attorney is error, and thirdly that if the record
does not shew the infancy of the Plaintiff then the Court must
take the cour truth to be that JeffrieJeffrie was an adult and that an
adult except in cases of coverture cannot appear by a next friend
on the first point it is not entirely clear that the court should have
set the proceedings aside for the irregularity was occasioned by the
act of the plaintiff or by the act of some one who pretended to act for
him, but on the second ground there is manifest error in the judgment
and proceedings = The law is that when an infant has cause of suit
the suit may be commenced by guardian or next friend previous=
ly appointed according to Law & when none has been appointed then
the guardianship or next friend may be made without any other
formality then the next friend acknowledging in open court that
he will act as such, or the evidence may be made by the acknowl-
edgment being in writing and filed with the declaration, no such
evidence exists in this case, there was therefore no lawful pro-
clein any yet one did in fact act - exist= Now if it did appear that
the plaintiff was an infant which it does not it would be error
to appear by an unauthorized person = This person appears by
attorney as well as by next friend, this would also be error if
the plaintiff were an infant, But so far as any thing appears
by the record we are bound to suppose that this person was
not an infant â nothing appears by which we could distin-
guish that this plaintiff was not of age any more than in
other cases except by a subsequent affidavit â in every call
the Court will take every plaintiff and every defendant to
be of full age till the point is made and the evidence heard and
though Judgment be rendered against an infant it is good till
reverses = In this case then for all the purposes for which the
party's age is to be now considered we take the plaintiff to
have been of full age at the time the suit was commenced - It
was unlawful therefore for R Camp to present herself as the
next friend of this man in the way she did = no one has a
right to bring a suit or do the business of another so as to
make his acts binding in Law upon that other person without
his or her consent = It is urged by the counsel for the defendant
in error that this was a proceeding under the statue which

View original image: Page  102
[missing figure]
authorized persons holden in slavery to sue as poor persons for freedom
We have no doubt that the proceeding was of that character = The act of
the legislature on that subject provides that when any person holden
in slavery shall wish to prosecute his suit for freedom he or she
shall shall present a petition to the court for leave to sue and if
the court shall be of opinion that the claim to freedom is well
founded, that leave shall be given to the petitioner to sue as a poor
person and the Court shall assign the petitioner Counsel, in this
case no counsel was assigned, but leave is given to sue by his next
friend R Camp = It is assumed that the plaintiff was an infant
and that R Camp was the next friend = This act respecting suits
for freedom leaves the common law as it was before its passage
as to the rights of infants to sue*= *If counsel had been appointed in this case still the question how shall an infant appear would be the subject of consideration. If counsel had been appointed
in this case and no pretended next friend had interfered the
there would have been a binding judgment until coersed= We
cannot see how this Judgment can be supported it is perhaps
both erroneous & irregular- irregularity is no cause of reversal
until the Court below have acted on the irregularity_that has
been done in this case = The Judgment is reversed with costs and
remanded to the Circuit CourtCircuit Court for further proceedings= M McGerk
George Tompkins = Judge WashWash having been counsel in the cause
gave no opinion = Saturday 30th April 1835 Jeffrey = vs= Joseph Ro=
bidoux Error from St. Louis Circuit CourtCircuit Court = And now at this day come
the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and the court now here being sufficiently advised of and concerning the premises consider that
the Judgement aforesaid in form aforesaid by the said Circuit CourtCircuit Court ren=dered be reversed and for nought held and esteemed and it is or-
dered by the Court that the cause be remanded to the said Cir-
cuit Court for further proceedings in said Cause in conformity
with the opinion of this court delivered in this case, and it is
further considered by the court that the said Jeffrey recover of the
said JosephJoseph Robidous his costs and charges by him about the
prosecution of his writ of error in this case expended and that
he have thereof execution = State of MissouriMissouri Third Judicial
district J Joseph C BrownBrown Clerk of the Supreme CourtSupreme Court for
the third Judicial District in the State of MissouriMissouri do certify