Case ID: mich_90/html/0265-01.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

Albert H. Petrie v. Albert Dickerman, Circuit Judge of Muskegon County.
    [See 88 Mich. 43.]
    
      Accounting — Hearing—Examination of books.
    
    The order of respondent denying the application of relator, in whose favor a decree for an accounting had been made, for an order requiring the defendant to deposit with the register of the court the books in which the transactions in controversy were entered, and which were in defendant’s possession, to enable the complainant to prepare for a hearing on such accounting, is vacated, and respondent is directed to hear the application, and make such order as will give the relator a full and fair opportunity to examine said books of account before said hearing, in order to prepare himself therefor.
    
      Mandamus.
    
    Argued February 9, 1892.
    Granted in part February 10, 1892.
    Eelator is complainant in Petrie v. Torrent, 88 Mich. 43, in which case an accounting was ordered on the sale by the defendant of pine lands, of which complainant held a verbal option, and which were deeded to defendant, who furnished the purchase money, under an agree•ment to give complainant one-third of the net profits resulting from the transaction.
    In pursuance of the decree, respondent assigned March 21, 1892, as the time for hearing the accounting therein provided for; whereupon, on January 30, 1892, relator applied to respondent for an order requiring the defendant, in whose custody were the books in which the transactions in controversy were entered, to produce the same, and to deposit them with the register of the court, in order that relator could have opportunity to prepare for a hearing on such accounting, which application was denied.
    Relator applies .for a mandamus requiring respondent to vacate to his order denying said application, and to grant the same.
    
      Bunker & Carpenter, for relator.
    
      Smith, Nims, Hoyt & Erwin, for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

The writ will be granted vacating the order of the circuit judge, denying the application of relator to have the books containing the account of the ¡umbér transactions deposited in the court; and, while the writ will not issue to the full extent as prayed, the court below is directed to hear the application, and to make such order as will give relator a full and fair opportunity to examine such books of account before the hearing of the accounting, so that he can prepare himself therefor.