Brooks v. Schultz
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order. This action was brought by James Brooks against Jackson S. Schultz, and others, composing the Metropolitan Board of Health, and for the purpose of procuring an injunction against the proposed action of the Board. A preliminary injunction was obtained, ex parte, on numerous affidavits.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order. This action was brought by James Brooks against Jackson S. Schultz, and others, composing the Metropolitan Board of Health, and for the purpose of procuring an injunction against the proposed action of the Board. A preliminary injunction was obtained, ex parte, on numerous affidavits. The defendants, on an affidavit showing that they desired to move to vacate the injunction, that they had requested the affiants, on the part of the plaintiff, to make affidavits in their behalf, which they had declined to do, and that they desired to procure their testimony to be used on a…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.*—Robertson, C. J.
On the argument of the appeal in this case, as well as on the argument before me at special term, the counsel on both sides took for granted that an order made, ex parte, to appoint a referee to examine witnesses for the purpose of using them examination on a motion, was regular; that the adverse party was entitled to no notice of the examination, and if he attended could only do so to *126watch the proceedings, and take advantage of any unfairness or irregularity in conducting the examination. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs,'on such assumption directed his…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Dorsey v. PackwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
- Bacon v. MageeNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Jackson ex dem. Green v. KentNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Wait v. WhitneyNew York Supreme Court · 1827
3Cited by1 opinion
- Thorn v. SheilNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1873