
    Millen et al. v. Fogg et al.
    
    
      (Superior Court of New York City, General Term.
    
    March 2, 1891.)
    Reference^When Ordered.
    Where, on the application for an order of reference on the ground that the action would involve the taking of a long account, the character of the case as disclosed by all the papers shows that there are no difficult questions of law, the fact that the only specific allegation of such fact was made by plaintiff, who is not a lawyer, will not prevent a reference.
    Appeal from special term.
    Loring R. Millen and another sued John C. Fogg and another. Defendants appealed from an order of reference, granted on the ground that the trial of the action would involve the taking of a long account.
    Argued before Sedgwick, C. J., and Truax and Dugro, JJ.
    
      L. J. Morrison, for appellants. James G. Janeway, for respondents.
   Per Curiam.

Although the only specific allegation that there were no difficult questions of law was made by the plaintiff, who was not a lawyer, yet the character of the case, as disclosed by all the papers, showed there was no such question. Welsh v. Darragh, 52 N. Y. 590, and other cases, required that the judge below should make the order appealed from. Order affirmed, with $10 costs. All concur.  