M'Inroy v. Benedict
New York Supreme Court
A MOTION was made to set aside the report of referees in this cause. The report was made by two only of the three referees appointed by the rule of court. The other referee was duly notified of the Jtjjpe*and place of meeting, but did not attcn(l; and the othertwo referees, in the absence of the Pla*int^^ proceeded, ex parte, in the examination, and reported in favour of the defendant.
Read the full summary
A MOTION was made to set aside the report of referees in this cause. The report was made by two only of the three referees appointed by the rule of court. The other referee was duly notified of the Jtjjpe*and place of meeting, but did not attcn(l; and the othertwo referees, in the absence of the Pla*int^^ proceeded, ex parte, in the examination, and reported in favour of the defendant. Several other exceptions , _ _ . . _ t _ r were taken, to the report oí which the court did not take notice.
1Per curiam
The only objection made to the report of the referees,which we think necessary to notice, is, that it was made by two oril®^n the absencé of the third, who had not attended, or heard t^ie Prc°fs- As due notice of the time and place of meeting had been given by the plaintiff, his absence would have formed ... , ,. , , „ , no objection to the proceedings, had all the referees attended, But this, we think, a fatal objection. It is necessary that all should meet, and hear the proofs; and then the report of any two is valid. This appears, necessarily, to result from the phraseology of the act,…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Ex parte RogersNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Bulson v. . LohnesNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
- Sage v. MosherNew York Supreme Court · 1859
- Carpenter v. WoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1840
- Howard v. ConroSupreme Court of Vermont · 1829
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.