
    ANGEL v. RAE.
    (City Court of New York, General Term.
    April 27, 1899.)
    Reference—Long Account—What Constitutes.
    In an action by an attorney for services, an itemized bill containing about 25 separate items is not a “long account,” within Code Civ. Proc. % 1013, providing that a reference may be had where the trial will require the examination of a long account.
    Appeal from special term.
    Action by James R. Angel against Charles Rae. From an order of _ reference, defendant appeals.
    Reversed.
    Argued before MCCARTHY and O’DWYER, JJ.
    Oliver E. Davis, for appellant.
    James R. Angel, in pro. per.
   O’DWYER, J.

The action was brought to recover forservices ren--dered by the plaintiff as an attorney under two separate contracts. For a first cause of action, plaintiff alleges a contract for the prosecution to judgment of an action in the supreme court for a. stipulated! sum, and the completion and fulfillment of that contract by the entry of judgment; for a second cause of action, the subsequent employment of plaintiff to collect the judgment through proceedings in the surrogate’s court of Westchester county, the services rendered in that court, and the reasonable value thereof. The affidavit upon which? plaintiff moved for the order of reference states that the bill of particulars, as filed, contains about 25 separate and distinct items of service and credits, which on the trial will be legitimate subjects of investigation. Conceding this statement to be true, a careful examination of the pleadings, affidavits, and bill of particulars fails to disclose that there is involved a “long account,!’" within, the meaning of section 1013, Code Civ. Proc. Feeter v. Arkenburgh, 147 N. Y. 237, 41 N. E. 518.

The order appealed from should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, without costs.

McCARTHY, j., concurs.  