Lewis v. . Blue

Merrimon, C. J.: Accepting the evidence as true, the plaintiffs’ attorneys had no authority to sell, transfer or assign their judgment; they simply had authority to collect the judgment in the way allowed by law and to take all proper legal steps for that purpose. They had not authority to take anything in payment of the judgment other than money, or less than the face value thereof, unless they had been specially authorized by the plaintiffs to do so. Bank v. Grim, 109 N. C., 93. So that the sale or assignment of the judgment was void and ineffectual. The principal counsel, at a distance from the Court when the judgment was docketed, might avail himself of the services of local counsel in collecting the judgment, as he did do in this case, and such local counsel might, in good faith, collect and give a valid receipt for the money received. The *423 nature of the duties of attorneys in collecting debts implies authority to avail themselves of local counsel to look constantly and carefully after the creditor’s interests. Such authority may be exercised in the orderly course of such business. Rogers v. MeKenzie, 81 N. C , 164; Branch v. Walker, 92 N. C., 89; Beck v. Bellamy, 93 N. C., 129; Bradford v. Williams, 91 N. C., 7. The assignment of the judgment was void, but the plaintiffs’ counsel received fifty dollars on account of the same. This sum should go to the discharge of that much of the judgment, certainly, in the absence of objection by the defendant or the party who paid it for him. The plaintiffs can only look to their attorneys for the money so collected. Affirmed.