From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rogers v. Durant

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 26, 1874
56 N.Y. 669 (N.Y. 1874)

Summary

In Rogers v. Durant (56 N.Y. 669) we held that an order appointing a referee, and requiring one who has refused to make an affidavit claimed to be necessary for the purpose of a motion to appear before such referee and make affidavit (Code, § 401), did not affect a substantial right of the witness, and was not reviewable in this court.

Summary of this case from Berdell v. Berdell

Opinion

Argued April 28, 1874

Decided May 26, 1874

Carlisle Norwood, Jr., for the appellant.

Ira Shafer for the respondent.


RAPALLO, J., reads memorandum for dismissal of appeal.

All concur.

Appeal dismissed.


Summaries of

Rogers v. Durant

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 26, 1874
56 N.Y. 669 (N.Y. 1874)

In Rogers v. Durant (56 N.Y. 669) we held that an order appointing a referee, and requiring one who has refused to make an affidavit claimed to be necessary for the purpose of a motion to appear before such referee and make affidavit (Code, § 401), did not affect a substantial right of the witness, and was not reviewable in this court.

Summary of this case from Berdell v. Berdell
Case details for

Rogers v. Durant

Case Details

Full title:HENRY J. ROGERS, Respondent, v . WILLIAM F. DURANT

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 26, 1874

Citations

56 N.Y. 669 (N.Y. 1874)

Citing Cases

Berdell v. Berdell

As the order did not rest in discretion, and was wholly unauthorized, and as the defendant had the right, if…