
    Dubois against Roosa.
    Rules by con^ent between parties, or their attormes, are not binding, book" of common mies, °v reduced to writing, and themforsome person athorised for that purpose.
    L. ELMENDORF, for the plaintiff,
    moved for a retaxation of the costs, and to set aside the judgments of nonsuit entered in four other causes between the same parties, pn , the ground of irregularity. It appeared that five actions of trespass had been brought by the plaintiff against the defendant, which were noticed for trial at the last Ulster . . . . , circuit. One of them was brought on to trial, and the plaintiff was nonsuited. The defendant entered up judgxnent in all the causes, and proceeded to have the costs „ taxed m each.
    
      Hawkins, contra,
    read affidavits, stating that a rule had been entered in the minutes of the clerk of the circuit, by-consent of the plaintiff’s counsel, that four of the causes should abide the event of the cause first brought on to trial.
   Per Curiam.

No rules by consent, except such as are entered in the book of common rules, are binding, unless signed by the attornies. According to the spirit of former decisions of the court, no agreements between parties or their attornies, are binding, unless in writing, and signed by them, or by some person authorised for that purpose, or entered in the book of common rules. The costs prior to the circuit, as to the cause tried, may be retaxed, but the costs, in the other four causes, must abide the event.  