
    Edward McInnes et al., Plaintiffs, v. George N. Gardiner, Defendant.
    (Supreme Court, New York Special Term,
    April, 1899.)
    Inspection and discovery — Attempt' of moving party to discover whether his answer is true.
    Where the real purpose of the defendant, in moving for an inspection of the books of account of the plaintiff’s intestate, is to discover whether or not a certain allegation of the answer is true, the motion will be denied.
    Motion by the defendant for an inspection of books of account.
    Taylor & Parker, for'motion.
    Asa Bird Gardiner, opposed.
   Giegerich, J.

The application for discovery is based solely upon the allegation in the answer upon information and belief that plaintiffs’ intestate contrary to agreement, sold paints to other persons at a lower price than that given to the defendant," and discovery is sought merely because the books’ would show the sales to such other persons. Nothing is presented in support of the proposition that the sales thus made were in fact at a lower price, and it would certainly appear that the object of the. discovery is solely to obtain information as to whether or not the allegation of the answer is true, and under these- circumstances, the motion may not .be granted. Dickie v. Austin, 4 Civ. Pro. 123. Moreover,'it appears that the books are not in this country. The application for a commission is granted. Plaintiffs’ diligence and good faith seem apparent, and I find no reason for the imposition of terms.". Motion for discovery denied, with $10 costs. Motion for commission granted, without costs.;

Ordered accordingly.  