Parsons v. Belden
New York City Court
Appeal by plaintiff from an order. This action was' brought by Milo H. Parsons and George D. Hastings against Alfred G. Belden to recover $1,700, upon three causes of action—one for $200 damages for breach of contract of hiring for one year, from January 2, 1875, at a salary of $3,000 ; the second for $1,250 loaned; and the third for $200 damages for profits that might have been realized from filling orders taken by defendant while in the plaintiffs’ employment, but which…
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiff from an order. This action was' brought by Milo H. Parsons and George D. Hastings against Alfred G. Belden to recover $1,700, upon three causes of action—one for $200 damages for breach of contract of hiring for one year, from January 2, 1875, at a salary of $3,000 ; the second for $1,250 loaned; and the third for $200 damages for profits that might have been realized from filling orders taken by defendant while in the plaintiffs’ employment, but which were filled by defendant, or a firm of which he became a member. The defendant’s answer was a general denial. As the…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCue, J.
The question presented on this appeal is whether, upon examination of the party before trial, the party can be compelled to produce books and papers by the service upon him of a subpoena duces tecum alone without even directing the production of said books and papers.
There seems to be no doubt that upon the examination of a party, at the instance of the adverse party, upon the trial of the action, the attendance of the party can be secured by the service upon him of a subpoena, as in the case of an ordinary witness, and that *57lie may be compelled to produce upon said examination any books and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hauseman v. SterlingNew York Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ahlmeyer v. HealyNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1887
- Fluchtwanger v. DessarNew York Supreme Court · 1889
- Keenan v. O'BrienNew York Supreme Court · 1889