From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gibbons v. San Luis Mining Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 8, 1908
125 App. Div. 741 (N.Y. App. Div. 1908)

Opinion

May 8, 1908.

Chester A. Jayne [ Samuel S. Watson and Walter B. Raymond with him on the brief], for the appellant.

Charles M. Demond, for the respondent.


The subpœna was issued by a referee duly appointed by an order of a justice of the Supreme Court to take the deposition of the defendant Myra B. Martin, individually and as executrix of the last will and testament of Walter S. Logan, deceased, and of the defendant the San Luis Mining Company, by said Myra B. Martin, its secretary and treasurer, pursuant to the provisions of section 873 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The subpœna required the production of certain books and records of the corporation for the purpose of having them examined by the witness during her examination to refresh her recollection. Upon her examination which has been had in part, it appears that with respect to certain matters deemed material to the issue, she was unable to recollect the facts but admitted that her recollection could be refreshed. Some of the records concerning which she was thus interrogated and which the subpœna required the corporation to produce, were presumptively kept by her or contained entries made by her as secretary or treasurer; but whether or not the entries were made by her, they may refresh her recollection and their production was properly required by the subpœna.

The original order for the examination required the production of certain books and records by the corporation, embracing those specified in the subpœna. On motion at Special Term, it was modified by striking out this provision. The learned counsel for the appellant urges that this was an adjudication that no production of the books and papers of the corporation could be required. Such is not the effect of the order modifying the original order. The order required the production of very many books and records of the corporation, and the court on the facts presented in advance of the examination, in its discretion, relieved the corporation from the provision of the order requiring it to produce its records. The order, however, as it stands, authorizes the complete examination of the witness and of the corporation through the officer specified, as fully as the same might be had upon the trial, and upon its appearing on the examination that all of the material knowledge possessed by the witness could not be obtained unless she had before her certain books and records of the corporation for examination by her to refresh her recollection and enable her to testify, it was perfectly proper for the referee to issue a subpœna duces tecum in behalf of the plaintiff to require the corporation to produce the books and records, not for inspection by counsel for the plaintiff nor for the purpose of introducing them in evidence with a view to contradicting the witness or otherwise, because that must be deferred until the trial, but for the purpose of refreshing the recollection of the witness and enabling her to give the material testimony sought to be obtained.

It follows that the order should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs, and the respondent corporation should be required to produce the books and records specified in the subpœna before the referee at a time and place to be specified in the order on the settlement thereof.

INGRAHAM, McLAUGHLIN, CLARKE and SCOTT, JJ., concurred.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied as stated in opinion, with ten dollars costs. Settle order on notice.


Summaries of

Gibbons v. San Luis Mining Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 8, 1908
125 App. Div. 741 (N.Y. App. Div. 1908)
Case details for

Gibbons v. San Luis Mining Co.

Case Details

Full title:JOHN J. GIBBONS, as Director of the SAN LUIS MINING COMPANY, Appellant, v…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 8, 1908

Citations

125 App. Div. 741 (N.Y. App. Div. 1908)
110 N.Y.S. 96

Citing Cases

Matter of Sperry

When so produced, however, their use is limited to refreshing the recollection of the witness. ( Horst v.…

New York City Car A. Co. v. Regensburg Sons

When so produced, however, their use is limited to refreshing the recollection of the witness. ( Horst v.…