
    *Field against Howland.
    whore the piyy »p-{⅛ioop-iuCm-alViof'TUÍ ¡m í, ami Sier bearing his explanations, withdrew, without making any further opposition, and the defendant obtained his discharge; the court, on motion, ordered a perpetual stay of execution on the part of the plaintiff*, and if the defendant. had applied immediately after his discharge, a discontinuance would have been ordered, under the circumstances of the case.
    TEE defendant obtained his discharge as an insolvent debtor, on the 8th of January, 1812, under the insolvent act of the 3d of April, 1811. The agent and attorney of the plaintiff appeared before the judge, in behalf of the plaintiff, a judgment creditor, to oppose the defendant’s discharge ; and after ex-amiuing the insolvent, became satisfied, as the affidavit, on the part of the defendant stated, with the explanations of the defendant, relinquished all opposition, and consented to his discharge, which was thereupon granted by the judge. No proceedings were, afterwards, had on the part of the plaintiff, until since the last term, when an execution was taken out against the defendant. The affidavit of the plaintiff's agent stated, that he did not expressly, or tacitly, consent to the defendant’s discharge ; but, finding opposition fruitless, under the act, he withdrew.
    A motion was now made to set aside the execution, and for a perpetual stay of execution on the judgment.
    
      Brinckerhojjr, for the defendant.
    
      C. W. Graham, for the plaintiff.
   Per Curiam,

The conduct of the plaintiff’s attorney is equivalent to an abandonment of his suit; and if the defendant had applied, after obtaining a regular discharge under the act, for a discontinuance, we should have ordered a rule for that purpose, to be entered. We think, under these circumstances, that the motion ought to be granted.

Motion granted.  