Russell v. McLellan
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine
This was a bill in equity to compel a further account by [Isaac] McLellan, who had been joint owner with the complainant, [Joseph Russell,] either as co-partner or member of a corporation in a factory situated in Framingham, in this state, and had been agent for it many years.
Read the full summary
This was a bill in equity to compel a further account by [Isaac] McLellan, who had been joint owner with the complainant, [Joseph Russell,] either as co-partner or member of a corporation in a factory situated in Framingham, in this state, and had been agent for it many years. After an answer to the bill, denying any partnership, and a replication, the plaintiff proposed to require the respondent to produce all his books and accounts conneeted with that agency; and moved for an order on him to that effect, and also for leave to take depositions before a master in chancery in respect to the…
1Opinion of the Court
WOODBURY, Circuit Justice.
The motion so far as regards the leave asked to take testimony before a master in respect to the ' books and accounts of the parties, seems reasonable, considering the nature of the case. It asks a departure from the 47th rule of the court, -which allows depositions to be taken if notice is given and written interrogatories and cross-interrogatories are first filed with the clerk. But a departure seems here useful to both parties, where so many unexpected questions may grow out of the examination of long accounts, as it will save the delay and expense in filing new…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Watson v. RenwickNew York Court of Chancery · 1820
- Eager v. Wiswall & PriceNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
3Cited by2 opinions
- Johnson Steel Street-Rail Co. v. North Branch Steel Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania · 1891
- In re duPontCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1899