Carthew hand versus BODINNER pasch will b r rot fill bail for a appearance do  not oust the privilege of a attorney I salk lev roll Abr I ass h in trover for  a cow c the defendant plead his privilege as a attorney of the court of c b  the plaintiff reply that at the time of exhibit his bill against the defendant  videlicet on such a day the defendant be in custody of the marshal of the  court of b r at the suit of one Katherine Maddern widow in a certain plea of  trespass and then and there the defendant by the court aforesaid tradit to be  in ballivum in plea prediction ad sectan speech katharinae Maddern prout to  stand open per record ind c super quo postea scilicet eoden die the plea  aforesaid of the say Katherine Maddern be not determine the plaintiff accord  to the course of the court car cap par Carthew er p time out of mind use and  approve exhibit his bill against the defendant here in court prout ei bene to  be for sale hoc c to this replication the defendant demurrer general and after  debate it be adjudge hill will that the matter in the replication be not  sufficient to oust the defendant of his privilege of a attorney for though a  attorney or other privilege person of the court of common plea or exchequer do  file bail in the court of b r for his appearance in that court upon a arrest  by process c yet this do not amount to a waiver of his privilege because this  no more than a bare appearance without which he can plead and take the benefit  of his privilege and therefore be may not only plead it in the same action in  which he appear by fill bail but in any other action upon declaration file  against he in the same term by the by accord to the course of the court and  though this fill bail in the first action give a opportunity to other to  deliver declaration against he by the by the same term accord to the course of  the court of b r yet that practice do not extend to exclude such defendant  from any advantage by plead to the jurisdiction of the court or otherwise  Carthew say per curian if the defendant have waive his privilege by plead in  chief to the first action and the plaintiff in this action bad show that  waiver in his replication then the defendant will have be oust of his  privilege in this action because a waiver of privilege in a prior action  depend in the court of b r be a waiver in all other action commence in that  term et per curian if a attorney of the court of c b be in actual custody of  the marshal of the court of b r by process there he can plead his privilege in  any action on any bill file against he for if he shall there will be a failure  of justice so if a attorney of c b be bring into the court of b r at the suit  of a attorney there which be a estoppel to the defendant S privilege even in  such case the defendant shall be oust of his privilege in all other action  commence against he in b r in the same term because the jurisdiction of this  court be attach upon he by the first action the judgement be quod billa empty