Les reportes del cases in Camera Stellata, 1593 to 1609 from the original ms. of John Hawarde edited by William Paley Baildon Published 1894 Page 70
In Camera Stellata, coram conslllo ibidem. Die veneris 15° Aprilis, An. Do. 1597, Elizab. 39, termino pasche.
Aldrige and Googe, plaintiffs, Woolrige, Wheatecrofte and Partrige, defendants.
Woolrige, by warrant of attorney, sued on a bond against Aldrige, who was bound for the debt but [was] not the principal [debtor], and by a supposed warrant of attorney, he [Woolrige] retained one Wheatecrofte, an attorney of the Common Bench, and paid both their fees for the plaintiff and the defendant also; which [Wheatecrofte] commenced a suit in the Kings Bench, and took bail, and entered a non sum informatus in the name of one Partrige, who is ignorant of this and denies that he was ever privy to it. And he [Wheatecrofte] had judgment and execution in one term against Aldrige, without any notice or process served on him, whereas the course in the Bench is that a man shall be arrested on a latitat and shall have bail or shall prefer a bill in Middlesex.
For this offence Woolrige was fined £100, and Wheatecrofte £300, and to be ‘hurle over the barre at Westminster’, and never to be an attorney, nor to have any office in the law, to be expelled from ‘Furnifolles Inne’ for ever, and both of them to wear papers at Westminster and at the Assizes where they dwell.
See also STAC Gooch