Williams v. Benton.
Before: Sanderson
Synopsis
Reference. — In an equity case, where the trial of an issue of fact is involved, requiring the examination of a long account on either side, the Court may order a reference, with directions to the referee to report upon the account, or any issue of fact involved in the account.
Referee—Power to Appoint.—The Court has no power, without the consent of the parties, to order a reference for the tidal of any other issue of fact than that involved in the examination of an account in an equity case.
Same.—The Court has no power, where either of the parties object, to order a reference with directions to the referee to report a judgment.
Same.—In an action to dissolve a partnership and obtain a settlement of the partnership accounts, the Court has power to order a reference for the trial of all the issues of fact relating to the condition of the partnership accounts, but it has no power, if objection is made, to order a reference of the trial of any other issue or issues in the case, nor to direct the referee to report a judgment.
By the Court, Sanderson, C. J. This is an action brought to dissolve a copartnership, and [425]to obtain a settlement of the partnership accounts. The plaintiff claims to be an equal partner. This is denied by the defendant, who avers that the interest of the plaintiff" in the concern is only one third. Whether the plaintiff’s interest is one half or one third is the principal issue involved in this case. When the case was called for trial the plaintiff moved for the appointment of a referee to try all the issues, and report a finding and judgment thereon. This motion was resisted by the defendant, but was allowed by the Court, and ■the case was accordingly referred. The order of reference was excepted to by defendant, who now assigns the same as error.
It is not denied by the appellant that the Court had the power to direct a reference, so far as the issue as to the balance of the partnership account is concerned; but it is claimed that the Court had no power to refer the other issues involved in the case, except upon the agreement or consent of the parties.
The power of the Court to compel a reference is derived from the one hundred and eighty-third section of the Practice Act, and can be exercised only as therein provided. The first subdivision of that section is the one relied on by the respondent as authorizing the order in question, and is in the following language, viz.: “When the trial of an issue of fact requires the examination of a long account on either side—in which case the referees may be directed to hear and decide the whole issue, or report upon any specific question of fact involved therein”— a reference may be ordered. The word “ issue” is used twice, and each time in the singular number, and no other issue is mentioned than such as requires the examination of a long account, and no power is given the Court to direct the referee to report a judgment. If there be but one issue in the action, and that issue involves the examination of a long account, the whole case may be sent to a referee; but, even in such a ,case, he cannot be invested with power to report a j udgment.' If, however, there are other issues in the case, not involving the examination of a long account, the Court has no compulsory power to send them to a referee for trial.
The character of the issue which may be referred is partieu[426]
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)