
    GENERAL COURT,
    MAY TERM, 1801.
    Wilson's Ex’x. use Rine, vs. Hammitt, et al.
    
    The legal plaintiff has control over the suit, and may dismiss or prosecute it as he pleases.
    This was an action of debt in Frederick * court, and the following statement appeared in the record on an appeal to this court. The plaintiff, Mrs. Wilson, who is the mother of the defendant [Hammitt, the principal in the bond on which the suit is brought, by J. T. Mason, claiming to be her attorney, came into the county court, and denied the right of John Rine, the person for whose use the said suit is said to be brought, to the bond upon which it is brought, and claimed the same as her property, and alleged that said bond had never been assigned to, or in any manner transferred to Rine; and Mrs. Wilson, by her said attorney, in open court, ordered, and does hereby order the said suit to be dismissed. The county court, (Potts, Ch. J.) refused to permit the said J. T. Mason to enter his appearance to the said suit for the purpose expressed, because it appeared that a certain J. Horsey had instituted the said suit, and was the attorney of record for prosecuting the same, and still claims to be the attorney for John Rine, and for him prosecutes this suit in the name of Mrs. Wilson, without having any special authority from her; and because the said Mason was one of the attorneys of record for ,the defendants, for defending the said suit, from November term 1791, at which term the defendants appeared and gave bail, and continued as one of their attorneys of record for the purpose aforesaid, until the moment that a jury was directed to be em-pannelled for the purpose of trying the issue in the said cause, (March 1800,) when the said Mason ordered the clerk to strike out his appearance for the defendants, and to enter it for the plaintiff, Mrs. Wilson, and to strike off the action, or to enter his order for discontinuing, the same of record in the cause. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, from which Mrs. Wilson appealed to this court.
    
      
      Mason, for appellant,
    produced to the general court a power from Mrs. Wilson, authorising him to appear for her, &c, and the court admitted the said Mason to appear for her,
    
      Mason, for the appellant, issued an attachment against John Mine for the costs, adjudged on the re-, ■versal of the judgment.
   The Generar Court reversed the judgment of the County Court,  