Case Name: In the Matter of the Application of the Interocean Mercantile Corporation et al., Respondents, for the Appointment of an Arbitrator. Gertrude A. Buell, as Executrix of George C. Buell et al., Appellants
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1923-06-12
Citations: 236 N.Y. 586
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Application of the Interocean Mercantile Corporation et al., Respondents, for the Appointment of an Arbitrator. Gertrude A. Buell, as Executrix of George C. Buell et al., Appellants.
Judges: Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ. Dissenting: Pound and Crane, JJ.
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 236
Pages: 586–587

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Application of the Interocean Mercantile Corporation et al., Respondents, for the Appointment of an Arbitrator. Gertrude A. Buell, as Executrix of George C. Buell et al., Appellants.
Practice — arbitration ■ — • motion for commission to take testimony without the state denied.
Matter of Interocean Mercantile Corporation v. Buell, 206 App. Div. 658, affirmed.
(Argued May 29, 1923;
decided June 12, 1923.)
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 27, 1923, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion for a commission to take testimony without the state. The following question was certified: “ Has the Supreme Court of the state of New York power to direct by order that an open commission issue to take the depositions on oral questions of witnesses residing outside the state of New York for use in an arbitration proceeding directed by an order of the said Supreme Court in which an arbitrator was appointed by the said court on the application of one of the parties to a written contract which provided that differences thereunder should be determined by arbitration but which said contract was not acknowledged or proved as required by section 1449 of the Civil Practice Act? ”
Martin Conboy and Edwin N. Moore for appellants.
Winthrop W. Aldrich, Edwin J. Johnson and Otey McClellan for respondents.

Opinion:
Order affirmed, with costs; question certified answered in the negative; no opinion.
Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ. Dissenting: Pound and Crane, JJ.