Legal Opinion

Gardner v. Roycrofters

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 12, 1907Published

Action by Frederic W. Gardner against the Roycrofters and Elbert Hubbard. Application by plaintiff for an order directing that a commission be issued to take testimony in another state for use on a contemplated motion to punish defendant Hubbard for contempt. Application denied.

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

The power of the court to award a commission depends solely upon the statute. It is the contention of the plairfiff that subdivision 5 of section 888 of the Code of Civil Procedure is authority under which the court may exercise the power to issue the commission prayed for. A careful examination of Stake v. Andre, 18 How. Prac. 159, Crane v. Evans, 18 Abb. N. C. 444, Stubbs v. Ripley, 39 Hun, 623, and Matter of Plumb, 64 Hun. 317, 19 N. Y. Supp. 79, satisfies me that a commission to take the testimony of witnesses without the state, for use in the state, under subdivision 5 of section 888 of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Stake v. AndreNew York Supreme Court · 1859
  2. Crane v. EvansNew York Supreme Court · 1887
  3. In re PlumbNew York Supreme Court · 1892

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

Powered by the Exa API