
    LAUGHLIN, Assignee of LAUGHLIN, against ROBERT PEEBLES, Administrator of JOHN LAUGHLIN.
    IN ERROR.
    A party who has recovered a judgment in the court of Common Pleas, and . received the amount of it from the defendant, will not be permitted to reverse that judgment on a writ of error.
    Quere. — If a plaintiff in error withdraws his writ, and has an entry made upon the docket, “writ of error withdrawn,” whether it is not a retraxit, and will not bar another writ.
    This was a writ of error to the common pleas of Cumberland .county. The plaintiff in error was the plaintiff below.
    To October term, 1825, a writ of error issued at the instance of the plaintiff, to remove this same judgment; the record was not returned, but on the 12th of October, 1826, this entry was made upon the docket of the supreme court, “ writ of error withdrawn.” Another writ of error issued to October term, 1829, upon which the record was returned, and several errors assigned, which were now before the court.
    
      Alexander, for the defendant in error,
    moved to quash the writ on two grounds.
    1st. That the withdrawal of the writ of error,'on the 12th October, 1826, was a retraxit, and is a complete bar to the prosecution of another writ to remove the same judgment, Beecher v. Sherly, Cro. Jas. 211.
    2cL That an execution issued in the court below, at the instance of the plaintiff, upon his judgment, and . that he has .since received the amount from the defendant: and read a deposition made at the bar, to shew that the plaintiff had received the benefit'of his judgment, and also exhibited certain receipts, as further evidence of the same fact.
    Williamson, for the plaintiff in error.
    The withdrawal of a writ of errór by the attorney of a party is not a retraxit, which can only be done by the personal appearance of the party in court. 2 Sel~ Ion’s Brae. 338. Beecher’s case. 8 Coke’s Rep.. 58, An attorney of a party has no such power.. Jac. Law Die. 523.
    
      Carothers, on the same side. — A retraxit operates in the nature-of a release, and the powers of an attorney are not so comprehensive as to enable him to release the rights of his client.
    There were several judgments against the same defendant in favour of the same plaintiff and the receipts are not particularly applicable to the judgment which is removed by this writ of error.
    Alexander, in reply.
    It does not appear by whose direction the entry of “ writ of error withdrawn,” was made, whether by the party or his attorney: and while it remains upon the record of a court, competent to make the entry, even if erroneous, it is conclusive.
   The court being satisfied from the evidence exhibited that the plaintiff had received the benefit of his judgment, on this ground alone, quashed the writ of error.  