Gregory v. Chicago, M. & St. P.R.R.

• Decision Date: 01 January 1882
• Citation: 10 F. 529
• Parties: GREGORY v. CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE & ST. PAUL R.R. HARRIS v. SAME. MEIGHEN v. SAME.
• Court: United States Circuit Court, District of Iowa

10 F. 529

GREGORY v. CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE & ST. PAUL R.R.

HARRIS v. SAME.

MEIGHEN v. SAME.

United States Circuit Court, D. Iowa.

1882

LOVE D. J.

We are not governed, as counsel seem to suppose, by the provisions of the Iowa Code in determining this motion, but by the following provisions of the act of congress:

Section 724, Rev. St. 'Power to order production of books and writings in actions at law.'

'In the trial of actions at law the courts of the United States may, on motion and due notice thereof, require the parties to produce books or writings in their possession or power which contain evidence pertinent to the issue in cases under circumstances where they might be compelled to produce the same by the ordinary rules of proceedings in chancery.

'If a plaintiff fails to comply with such order, the court may on motion, give the like judgment for the defendants as in cases of nonsuit; and if a defendant fails to comply with such order the court may, on motion, give judgment against him by default.'

From this provision it is clear that the plaintiff's motion cannot be denied. But how, when, and where the books, etc shall be produced must be determined by the sound and just discretion of the court. To order the books of a corporation or any great business firm, to be brought from a distant place, where they may be constantly needed, to the place where the court is held, would be a practice in the highest degree inconvenient: neither would the court order the books of a firm or corporation to be taken from the possession of the owners, and placed in the custody of any person not interested in their safety and preservation. The right of a litigating party is to inspect to examine, and take copies, with view of securing information, and offering their contents in evidence. This right the law secures to him, and the court will order it to be done in such a way as to prejudice as little as possible the owners of the books. The owner of books in which he has kept his accounts, and which he may need for daily and hourly use, is just as much entitled to their custody as he is entitled to the possession and use of any other personal property. It would be most prejudicial and unjust to order a litigant to bring his books from a distant place, where they are in constant use, and deliver them to some officer of the court for the convenience of an adversary party. If such were the rule, a foreign insurance company or railroad corporation or private firm might be compelled, under penalties of contempt and default, to bring their books from far-distant...