Case ID: ny-st-rep_37/html/0366-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Loring R. Millen et al., Resp’ts, v. John C. Fogg et al., Appl’ts.
    
      (New York Superior Court, General Term,
    
    
      Filed March 2, 1891.)
    
    Reference—Long account.
    Where a long account is involved, and the character of the case as disclosed hy the papers shows that no difficult questions of law will arise, a reference may properly be ordered, although the only specific allegation as to such a fact is made by the plaintiff, who is not a lawyer.
    Appeal by defendants from an order of reference, granted on the ground that the trial of the action would involve the taking of a long account.
    
      L. J. Morrison, for app’lts; James G. Janeway, for resp’ts.
   Per Curiam.

Although the only specific allegation that there were no difficult questions of law was made by the plaintiff, who was not a lawyer, yet the character of the case, as disclosed by all the papers, showed there was no such question. Welsh v. Darragh, 52 N. Y., 590, and other cases, required that the judge below should malee the order appealed from.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs.

Sedgwick, Ch. J., Truax and Dugro, JJ., concur.