Martin v. Spofford
New York Supreme Court
Motion by plaintiff to compel production of books. James Martin and others, composing the firm of Martin & Co., bankers, in London, England, brought this action against Joseph L. Spofford, and others, composing the firm of Spofford Bros. & Co., merchants, in Few York city, for an accounting for certain moneys, amounting to about $20,000, advanced by the plaintiffs to the defendants, under an agreement that the same should be used in carrying on the Atlantic Phosphate Rock…
Read the full summary
Motion by plaintiff to compel production of books. James Martin and others, composing the firm of Martin & Co., bankers, in London, England, brought this action against Joseph L. Spofford, and others, composing the firm of Spofford Bros. & Co., merchants, in Few York city, for an accounting for certain moneys, amounting to about $20,000, advanced by the plaintiffs to the defendants, under an agreement that the same should be used in carrying on the Atlantic Phosphate Rock Company, which money it was alleged had been misapplied by them. On October 19, 1877, an order was obtained for the…
1Opinion of the CourtLawrence, J.
I cannot but regard this as an application to compel a party to the action to produce his books and papers while under examination as a witness before trial. The weight of authority is against such an application (Havemeyer v. Ingersoll, 12 Abb. Pr. N. S. 301; Hausman v. Sterling, 61 Barb. 347). “ The statute has pointed out the only mode by which a discovery of books and papers can be obtained before trial” (per Ingraham, P. J., in Hausman v. Sterling, supra).* The plaintiff’s course would seem to be to move for a discovery and inspection under *127sections 803, 804, and 805, et seq., of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hauseman v. SterlingNew York Supreme Court · 1872
- De Bary v. StanleyNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1874
3Cited by3 opinions
- Rosenbaum v. RiceNew York Supreme Court · 1901
- Bloom v. Pond's Extract Co.The Superior Court of New York City · 1891
- Fluchtwanger v. DessarNew York Supreme Court · 1889