Cocker v. Franklin Hemp & Bagging Co.
Opinion of the Court
Applications to review interrogatories in cases of this sort are rare in this court. And I wish, therefore, to say a few words as to the proper course of practice. In general, it seems to me, the most fit course is, that in cases of disagreement between the parties as to the form of the interrogatories and cross interrogatories, it should be referred to a master to settle the proper form of them, subject, of course, to au ultimate review by the court upon an appieal from his decision and report. In this way, by a hearing of the parties, as to the points in issue, the master will generally be able to direct the ultimate form of the interrogatories, so as to make them satisfactory to the parties. In reviewing interrogatories, it is impossible, in many eases, to decide, whether the interrogatory itself, or the particular form, in which it is propounded, is the proper one or not, without a knowledge of the general merits of the cause, or of the points in issue between the parties. Under such circumstances, it seems proper, that the court should reserve their ultimate decision until the trial in all doubtful cases, so that the party affected thereby may have a full opportunity to file exceptions to the ruling of the court, and thus to bring the matter under the review of the appellate court, or to move for a new trial. I shall deem it my duty generally to act upon this course of practice, as best adapted to secure the rights of all parties. When, therefore, exceptions are intended to be taken to any particular interrogatories or cross interrogatories, they should be propounded,
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.