New York Supreme Court, 1820

Fisher v. Dale

Fisher v. Dale
New York Supreme Court · Decided January 15, 1820
17 Johns. 343

Counsel

D. B. Ogden, for the plaintiffs, Wells, contra,

Fisher v. Dale

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

We see no solid objection to allowing a second commission. The examination of witnesses in the Court of Chancery is private ; and the proceedings in that court in *273relation to the manner of taking testimony, is so different from that of courts of law, that the reasons on which the practice in Chancery is founded, do not apply here. Suppose a witness has not answered some of the interrogatories, or has answered them in an obscure and unintelligible manner, it may be essential to the purposes of justice, to direct a second examination. If the witness himself should come to this country before the trial, the Court could not refuse to permit his examination, although his deposition had been taken in the cause.

Rule granted.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.