De Villeneuve v. Morning Journal Ass'n
This text of 206 F. 70 (De Villeneuve v. Morning Journal Ass'n) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Tetters rogatory have very rarely issued in this circuit. The statutes of the United States confer no general power upon the courts to issue them. Section 875, Rev. Stat. U. S. (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 667), does treat of letters issued in cases in which the United States is a party or has an interest, and this has been thought evidence of an intention upon the part of Congress to restrict the inherent power of the court. However, as we execute letters 'rogatory coming from foreign countries, and as this method of getting testimony is most necessary in countries which refuse to compel the attendance of witnesses under commissions, I think we ought not to suppose that [71]*71Congress intended to limit the power of the court. The subject has been considered in various aspects in Spanish Consul’s Petition, 1 Ben. 225, Fed. Cas. No. 13,202; In re Pacific Railway Commission (C. C.) 32 Fed. 241, 256; Re Letters Rogatory (C. C.) 36 Fed. 306; Gross v. Palmer (C. C.) 105 Fed. 833; Benedict’s Admiralty, § 456. This case is one in -which a number of the witnesses are likely to be unwilling, so that the examination should be oral, though that is a most unusual method, and not upon written interrogatories.
Motion granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
206 F. 70, 1913 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1378, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-villeneuve-v-morning-journal-assn-nysd-1913.