Hart v. Eyck
New York Court of Chancery
[ * 514 ] MOTION on the part of the defendants, to strike out the following part of the decretal order of the 5th of last May, viz.:—“ And that, for the better taking the said account, and discovery of,» and concerning the several matters aforesaid, the parties shall produce before the said master, on *oath, all books, papers, and writings, in their custody or power, or in the custody or power of any of them, relating thereto, and shall be examined upon interrogatories as…
Read the full summary
[ * 514 ] MOTION on the part of the defendants, to strike out the following part of the decretal order of the 5th of last May, viz.:—“ And that, for the better taking the said account, and discovery of,» and concerning the several matters aforesaid, the parties shall produce before the said master, on *oath, all books, papers, and writings, in their custody or power, or in the custody or power of any of them, relating thereto, and shall be examined upon interrogatories as the said master shall direct;” or that the order be so modified as to require the production of such books and papers only…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
[ * 516 ]
It was admitted by one of the counsel, in support of the motion, as a settled point, that on references to take and state an account, the Court may direct the parties to be examined on oath, by the master.' This appears to be the long-established practice of the Court; and it is considered, in the books, as a thing very much of course. Thus, in Purcell v. M'Namara, (17 Vesey, 434.) Lord Eldon considered it as the usual direction, to examine the parties as the master shall see fit, and that he settles the interrogatories. So Lord Hardwicke, in Cowslade v. Cornish, (2…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Alexander v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Alabama · 1845
- Niolon v. DouglasCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1836
- Templeman v. FauntleroySupreme Court of Virginia · 1825
- Winter v. LudlowUnited States Circuit Court · 1858