Gillespie v. Mulholland — 28 N.Y.S. 754

Majority

p. 754

(8 Misc. Rep. 511.)

GILLESPIE v. MULHOLLAND.

(City Court of New York, General Term.

May 18, 1894.)

Headnote

Attorney and Client—Summary Application—Reference.

Under Code Civ. Proe. § 3172, the court may direct a reference to hear and report on the questions arising on a summary application to compel an attorney to pay over money collected by him.

Appeal from special term.

Application by Michael H. Gillespie to compel John Mulholland to pay over money collected by him as an attorney at law. From an order granting a reference said- Mulholland appeals. Affirmed.

Argued before EHRLICH, C. J., and VAN WYCK and McCARTHY, JJ.

James Kearney, for appellant.

Jeroloman & Arrowsmith, for respondent.

It appears that Mulholland, the person proceeded against, collected the amount of a judgment recovered in this court, and declined to pay over the proceeds to the firm of Gillespie Bros., to whom they belonged. These persons thereupon applied to the court for an order directing Mulholland, as an attorney' and officer of the court, to pay the proceeds over, according to the duty incumbent upon him as such attorney and officer. The justice at special term, as he lawfully might, directed a reference to determine and report upon the questions arising upon the motion. Code, § 3172. Nothing has been decided against the appellant, and the only question submitted for review is whether the court below had the power to make the order directing a referee to inquire into the facts. As the statute furnishes warrant for the power assumed, there remains nothing for us to do but to affirm the order appealed from, with costs. All concur.