¶1We see no reason for interfering with the order made by the court below. It does not appear that any harm can come of the production of the letter in question. If it is material to any of the issues involved in the suit, then the plaintiff is clearly entitled to an inspection; if it is immaterial, then no harm is done by allowing an inspection thereof. We think therefore, that the order appealed from should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur.
22 N.Y.S. 118
Travers v. Satterlee
Decided February 17, 1893
New York Supreme Court · decided 1893-02-17
Action by Anna Frances Travers against Herbert L. Satterlee, executor of the last will and testament of Reverdy J. Travers, deceased, impleaded with Maria L. Travers and others, to determine the validity of a will. From an order directing that plaintiff be allowed to inspect a letter mentioned in said will, which she alleged to be in the possession of defendant Satterlee, he appeals.
Affirmed · Decided 1893-02-17