
    Scott against Elmendorf.
    An attorney n«eTonIefe ¡^rit iato rantedt !,y hfc er> td’ b,,in§ a second suit on the note, after ed in the first, Ment proof “o? the execution of the note.
    THIS .was an action for another bill of costs by the plaintiff, as attorney, in a Second suit against Philip Becker, on the same mote mentioned in the preceding case; in which, at the trial, the maker of the note proved that it had been paid ; and a verdiet was found for the defendant. In addition to the point re-t , lied oh m the last cause, the defendant, m this suit, objected that the plaintiff had no authority to bring the second Suit on the note against Becker, after being nonsuited in the- first.
    
      Sudam, for the defendant.
    Scott, for the plaintiff.
   Per Curiam.

In this case we consider the plaintiff as warranted, by his general retainer,, in bringing the sfoedtid suit ; and the principles adopted in the last case dispose also of the other objections in this cause.

Motion granted.  