Opinion
June, 1919.
Before a compulsory reference can be ordered, it must be shown that a long account is necessarily involved in the action and will require proof of so many items that a jury cannot be presumed to keep them in mind in order to render an intelligent verdict. A compulsory reference in the case of a lawyer against a client, although it should be allowed in a proper case, is not favored in the law; and in view of the peculiar character of the account stated in the bill of particulars, it is not shown that this action necessarily involves a long account. At any rate, in the absence of pleadings showing exactly the items that will be litigated between the parties, we think the motion for a compulsory reference should have been denied. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Jenks, P.J., Mills, Rich, Putnam and Blackmar, JJ., concurred.