McCullough v. Brodie

6 Duer 659
The Superior Court of New York City·Decided December 15, 1856·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

An action cannot be referred, except by consent of parties, merely because the trial of it will require proof of various small items of damage. To justify a compulsory reference, the trial must involve “the examination of a long account on either side,” according to the ordinary acceptation of the word account.

The only fact which authorizes a compulsory reference is the same, under the Code, as when the Revised Statutes alone gave the power to refer. (2 R. S. 384, § 40; Code, § 211, sub. 1; 19 Wend. 31; 25 id. 681; 6 id. 603; Van Rensselaer and others v. Jewett, 6 Hill, 313.) This case is reported in 13 How. Pr. R. 346.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

McCullough v. Brodie, 6 Duer 659 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1856).

6 Duer 659 (McCullough v. Brodie) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McLean v. East River Insurance
8 Bosw. 700 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1861)