Legal Opinion

Cavanagh v. O'Neill

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1897PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Motion to punish one of the official stenographers in New York for contempt in refusing to hand over a copy.of his minutes unless paid therefor twenty cents a folio. The stenographer had been ordered by both sides to deliver said minutes daily during the progress of the trial.

1Opinion of the CourtPryor, J.

That the court may make the order solicited, if the facts warrant it, was adjudged in Wright v. Nostrand, 58 How. 184; and, I understand, is conceded by the parties to the present motion.

McCarthy v. Bonynge, 12 Daly, 356, would be conclusive in favor of the motion, were section 3311 of the Code, regulating the charges of stenographers, identical now with what it was then. When McCarthy v. Bonynge was decided the section read: “Except where special provision is otherwise made by statute, a stenographer is entitled to • * * ten cents ” a folio. Now the section reads: “Except where, otherwise…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Walls v. . BaileyNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  2. Sipperly v. StewartNew York Supreme Court · 1867
  3. McCarthy v. BonyngeNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1884

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re the Application for the Payment of Administration Expenses in the Estate of BaumanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1931
  2. Hale v. McDermottAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1912

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API