Crompton v. Dobbs
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiff, William Crompton, from an order of the Supreme Court, riiade at the Flew York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of FFew York on the 4th day of April, 1907, vacating a subpoena duces tecum theretofore served upon the defendant herein.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam : .
Whenever it appears that a party under examination before trial cannot testify without reference to his books and papers it is competent to compel tbeir production by subpoena duces tecum. (Gee v. Pendas, 87 App. Div. 157.) Unless this could be done the attempted examination would' in many cases be defeated'. Ordinarily the occasion for the issuance of such a subpoena does not arise until the examination has so far proceeded as to demonstrate that the presence of the books and papers is necessary in order to enable the party under examination to testify. (Ryan v. Reagan, 46 App.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ryan v. ReaganAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900
- Gee v. PendasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
3Cited by3 opinions
- Grant v. LeopoldAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1908
- United States Drainage & Irrigation Co. v. HawleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
- United States Drainage & Irrigation Co. v. HawleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915