Case ID: misc_3/html/0618-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Von Ax Halstead, v. Halstead and Others.
    Appeal from order denying defendants’ motion for inspection of certain letters, written to plaintiff, and in her possession.
    
      John, M. Bowers, for defendants (appellants).
    
      Lmmson (& Falk, for plaintiff (respondent).
   Per Curiam.

There were certain characteristics of the application below which justify the decision that was made. It was uncertain that the letters contained anything that would benefit the defendants, if offered as evidence. Indeed, the contents are undisclosed. The application does not avow specifically that the contents, if learned, will be offered in testimony upon the trial.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs.