Case Name: Cutting et ux. v. Carter
Court: Superior Court of Chancery of Virginia
Jurisdiction: Virginia
Decision Date: 1810-02
Citations: 4 Hen. & M. 478
Docket Number: 
Parties: *Cutting et ux. v. Carter.
Judges: 
Reporter: Virginia Reports
Volume: 14
Pages: 955–955

Head Matter:
*Cutting et ux. v. Carter.
February Term, 1810.
Equity Practice — Order for Account — When Made.
This case was sent to the Chancellor in the last vacation, for an order for an account, while the cause stood at rules.
Equity Practice — Order of Reference — When Proper. —In Bassett v. Cunningham, 7 Leigh 410. it is said, by Tit ok.ur, P., that, if the cause should have been considered upon the answer, then there was no proof, nor indeed any allegation in the bill, which justified a reference of the account. Regularly a reference cannot be directed until the hearing, without consent. Clarke v. Tinsley, 4 Rand. 250; Cuttings. Carter, 4 Hen. & M. 478. Nor then, unless the plaintiff shows himself, by the proofs entitled to an account. The principal case is also cited in Patterson v. Martin, 33 W. Va. 497. 10 S. E. Rep. 819, to the same point, but held to have no bearing upon the case under consideration.

Opinion:
By the Chancellor.
An order for an account is not to be made as of course, and should not be directed, but upon a hearing, unless the parties consent. The application was therefore premature; but where it would be proper, as for instance, in all cases where the cause is ready for a decision, which cannot be had without an account, it should not be directed in vacation, without notice to the adverse party or his counsel.