Bill in Equity for an account. Pub. Stat. R. I. cap. 214, § 45, provides : “¡Whenever either party to any proceeding at law or equity in the Supreme Court, or to any proceeding at law in the Court of Common Pleas, shall set forth in writing, under oath, upon his knowledge or belief, that the opposite party is in the possession or control of some document to which the applicant is entitled, such court or a justice may order such opposite party, or, if the same be a body…
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1889-08-17
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently June 1930
4 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
¶1The defendant's motion to vacate the order is denied. The defendant, after having answered on oath whether he has the books and documents called for in his possession or control, and what he knows about their possession, will have the opportunity to contest the right of the complainant to their production. The statute does not require any notice to him before making the order. We are not able to see that the statute is in this respect unconstitutional, or that the necessity for notice is implied.
¶2The respondent then filed an answer to the petition, admitting that he held the books, and setting forth his reasons for declining to produce them.
