
    Gibbs against Loomis.
    NEWYORK,
    Oct. 1813.
    The privilege of attorneys of inferiorcoiirto from arrest by process from, the supreme court, does.not extend beyond the time of their necessary attendance on those courts'.
    THIS was an action of trespass, assault and battery, &c. The defendant pleaded that he was, before the filing of the plaintiff’s bill, and at this time is, an attorney of the court of common picas of Washington county, &c. attending to divers pleas and affairs, &c. of persons prosecuting and defending them as their attorney, &c. and that he and all other attorneys of that court, while so prosecuting and defending, according to the custom of the same court, &c. should not, nor ought to be drawn or compelled, nor at any time past have been drawn or compelled, against their will, to answer before any justice or other judges whatsoever, except before the said court of common pleas, nor any plea, plaint or demand, which does not touch the right of the people, &c. pleas of freehold and felonies only excepted; and this he is ready to verify, wherefore he prays judgment if he ought to answer, See.
    To this plea there was a demurrer and joinder in demurrer, and the same was submitted to the court without argument.
   Per Curiam.

The privilege of the officers of inferior couri~ from arrest by process from this court, has never been extended beyond the time of their necessary~attendance on those courts~ They have no exclusive perpetual privilege as against the jurisdic~ tion of this court.

Judgment of respondeas ouster.  