Van Marter v. Hotchkiss
New York Court of Appeals
William Van Marter, brought four suits in the supreme Court against Hiram G-. Hotchkiss and others, to recover for services and disbursements as an attorney, in conducting four litigations. The facts were the same in all the cases. The actions were each of them referred to a single referee, who reported in favor of the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
William Van Marter, brought four suits in the supreme Court against Hiram G-. Hotchkiss and others, to recover for services and disbursements as an attorney, in conducting four litigations. The facts were the same in all the cases. The actions were each of them referred to a single referee, who reported in favor of the plaintiff. The printed case on the appeal contains the following order for reference. {Title of the action.] “ On reading and filing affidavits, showing due cause therefor, and on motion' of 0. L. Lyon, of counsel for plaintiff, and on hearing D. H. Devoe, Esq., defendant’s…
1Opinion of the Court
Dehio, Ch. J.
[After stating facts.]—The position taken in the appellant’s points are, first, that compulsory references are a violation of the constitutional guaranty of the right of trial by jury; and, second, that this being an action, as it is said, to recover a single item, it is impossible that there could have been a long account.
It is difficult to conceive that these objections are seriously made. The practice of referring issues, the trial of which would require the examination of a long account, had prevailed, by the practice of the courts, if not since the establishment of the State…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Carman v. . PultzNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bolles v. . ScheerNew York Court of Appeals · 1919