Ring v. Mott

Decided January 26, 1850

The Superior Court of New York City · decided 1850-01-26

<p>The issuing of a commission to take the testimony of a witness out of the state, though usually directed, is not a matter of strict Tight.</p> <p>Where a commission is likely to produce great injury to the adverse party, terms •will be imposed, and in extreme cases it may be wholly refused.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1889

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1850-01-26

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the Court.

¶1The issuing of a commission is in the discretion of the -court It is usually done as of course, with or *684without a stay of proceedings, but it is not a matter of strict right. • The court must be governed in the exercise of its discretion, by what it is apparent will be the consequences'; and if it is evident that great injustice will be likely to ensue to the adverse party, it is far from being of course to grant it. In such a case, the court will either impose terms so as to preserve the rights of the adverse party, or will even refuse it, if no way for their protection can be devised.(a)

¶2 The cause stood over to enable the parties to make an arrangement,