
    LANE v. O. F. JONASSON & CO.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    October 23, 1908.)
    Discovert (§ 86*)—Right to.
    One suing for services was not entitled to an inspection of defendant’s books on a showing that defendant promised him “a piece of any new business” that he might be instrumental in obtaining, and that there was no definite arrangement as to his share of the profits.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Discovery, Dec. Dig. § 86.*]
    Appeal from Special Term.
    Action by Willis Arthur Lane against O. E. Jonasson & Co. Prom an order granting plaintiff an inspection of defendant’s books, defendant appeals. Reversed, and motion denied.
    Argued before PATTERSON, P. J., and INGRAHAM, LAUGH-LIN, CLARKE, and SCOTT, JJ.
    William J. Leitch, for appellant.
    Henry J. Goldsmith, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

Appeal from an order granting an inspection of defendant’s books and papers. The only foundation for the order which plaintiff has obtained is the statement contained in his complaint, and reiterated in his petition, that defendants agreed to pay him, in addition to a fixed salary, 20 per cent, of the profits realized in defendants’ business. In an affidavit read in support of his petition plaintiff details the facts relating to his employment, and shows that all that took place respecting any proportion of the profits was that he was promised “a piece of any new business that he (deponent) might be instrumental in obtaining,” and that even a definite arrangement as to such share of the profits was not made. This furnishes no ground for ordering an inspection of books and papers.

Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with $10 costs.  