
    
      Britt and another v. Van Orden.
    IN this case a letter was sent by A. B. the defendant’s attorney, in the month of November last, informing the plaintiff’s attorney, that special bail was then filed; the plaintiff relying upon this information, and not intending to object to the sufficiency of the bail, proceeded to enter his judgment in January term last; but had discovered since, that bail was not entered till the 29th of January ; it further appeared that the defendant’s attorney had acknowledged in his letter, that he was only employed to delay.
    
      Hopkins, for the plaintiff,
    now moves that the bail-piece, filed in January, be considered as filed on the first day of the preceding November.
    
    Woods, contra.
   Per Curiam.

This was an irregularity in practice not to be countenanced. Let the plaintiff take the effect of his motion, with costs to be paid by the defendant’s attorney himself.  