Central National Bank v. Arthur
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal from an order made at Special Term by Mr. Justice Jones. The action was to recover money received by the defendants to the plaintiffs’ use. After issue joined, the defendants were summoned by one of the judges of this court to be examined as witnesses before the trial, at the instance of the plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order made at Special Term by Mr. Justice Jones. The action was to recover money received by the defendants to the plaintiffs’ use. After issue joined, the defendants were summoned by one of the judges of this court to be examined as witnesses before the trial, at the instance of the plaintiffs. The defendants were at the same time served with a subpoena duces tecum, requiring them to produce at such examination the ledgers and other books of their firm which contained any entries of accounts with one William H. Sandford. The defendants on such examination refused to produce…
1Opinion of the Court
*198 By the Court:
Monell J.
The only question which it was proper for the justice at the Special Term to examine upon the motion made there, and which also is the only question which we can look at on this appeal, was, whether the court had power to enforce the mandate of a subpoena duees teeum, by requiring the production in court of the specified books.
The defendant placed his refusal upon several grounds, nearly all of which related to the competency of the evidence. Such objections could not be considered until the evidence was produced, and as all the preliminary proceedings for the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lane v. ColeNew York Supreme Court · 1852
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re the Estate of EbbetsNew York Surrogate's Court · 1935
- Smith v. MacDonaldThe Superior Court of New York City · 1876
- Holtz v. SchmidtThe Superior Court of New York City · 1871
- Hoyt v. JacksonNew York Surrogate's Court · 1885