Case ID: ny_87/html/0625-03.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

William P. Clyde et al., Appellants, v. Amos Rogers, Respondent.
    It is in the discretion of the court below, whether to set aside a subpoena duces tecum ; so also, whether permission shall be granted defendant to inspect and copy plaintiffs books; and the exercise of this discretion is not reviewable here.
    (Argued November 22, 1881;
    decided November 29, 1881.)
    This was an appeal from an order of General Term which reversed two orders of Special Term, one of which set aside a subpoena duces tecum, and the other denied an application for an inspection of, and permission to take copies of plaintiff’s books. (Reported below, 24 Hun, 145.)
    The court here say :
    “ Whether the subpoena duces tecu/m should be set aside was matter of discretion in the court below; and whether permission to inspect and copy plaintiff’s books should be granted was also matter of discretion. These are mere matters of practice with which we have no jurisdiction to interfere. The appeal should, therefore, be dismissed, with costs.”
    
      Samuel Boa/rdmam for appellants.
    
      Asa Bird Gardi/ner for respondent.
   Per Curiam

opinion for dismissal of appeal.

All concur.

Appeal dismissed.