Majority
p. 329Salisbury against Scott. ALBANY, August, 1810. read an affidavit, stating that questions of law would arise. He cited Adams v. Bayles, ( 2 Johns. Rep. 374 .) Low v. Hallet, (3 Caines, 82.)
Headnote
< Where a motion to refer & cause, is repelled by an affidavit, that questions of law will arise, such affidavit must state what the points of law are, to enable the court to judge of the propriety of granting or refusing the application,J. V. D. SCOTT moved for a reference of this cause, on the usual affidavit.
Van Buren, contra,
Where a motion to refer a cause, is repelled, on the ground that questions of law will arise on the examination of the cause, the party must state what the points of law are, so that the court may judge whe'-her they are material or difficult, and will necessarily arise ; and that we may be satisfied whether the referees be a proper tribunal for the trial of the cause ; otherwise, by the general affidavit, all references may be preV vented.
p. 330
1 he motion is denied, with costs to abide the event oí , the suit,
Motion denied.