Case ID: ri_23/html/0465-01.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

Moses Rosendale et al. vs. Mary McNulty.
    PROVIDENCE
    JANUARY 8, 1902.
    Present : Stiness, C. J., Tillingliast and Rogers, JJ.
    (1) Depositions. Commissioners. Incriminating Answers.
    
    A deponent cannot be excused from answering questions, on the ground that her answers would criminate herself, where the questions do not show that such a result would be possible.
    Application for a writ of attachment against a deponent who refused to answer certain questions before a commissioner on the ground that her answers would criminate her. Certified by commissioner to the court, under rule 34 of the Rules in Equity.
   Per Curiam.

The defendant, Mary McNulty, has refused to answer questions put to her in taking her-deposition, upon the ground that her answers would criminate herself. The questions do not show that such a result would be possible, and hence the questions should have been answered. A writ of attachment against said Mary McNulty will issue, unless at such time as shall be fixed by the master, within twenty days from this date, she shall appear before him and answer the questions which she refused to answer and shall also within that time pay the costs upon this citation, to he taxed by the clerk, and an additional sum of ten dollars for counsel’s fee for complainant’s counsel, which sums are not to he recovered back in any event.

T. M. O’Reilly, for complainants.

J. M. Brennan, for respondent.