ART. 75] PRODUCTION OF BOOKS——BILL OF DISCOVERY. 1681

This section does not oust equity of its Jurisdiction on a bill for discovery
and an accounting. Union, etc., Ry Co. v. Baltimore, 71 Md. 340.

No appeal lies from the action of the court under this section, such action
being Interlocutory. This section has no application to a case of issues sent
from an orphans' court to a court of law. Magraw v. Munnikhuysen, 35
Md. 292.

A motion for a Judgment by default because of the Insufficiency of an
answer to a bill of discovery was properly overruled, the bill of discovery
not being filed in time, no order ever having been asked for or passed by the
court, and the plaintiff's answer voluntarily filed, being sufficient. Rich v.
Boyce, 39 Md. 323.

Cited but not construed in Chappell v. Real Estate Co., 91 Md. 757;
Tome v. Parkersburg, etc., Co., 39 Md. 89.

As to the production of books and papers in equity, see art. 16, sections
25 and 26.

1904, art. 75, sec. 100. 1888, art. 75, sec. 98. 1888, ch. 529.

100. Whenever at the trial, hearing or any other stage of an action,
suit, petition, cause or matter at law or in equity, it shall appear to
the court that the attendance or testimony of any person or witness, or
the production of any paper, document or thing not produced by any
party is necessary to the purposes of justice, the court may require any
party to produce such paper, document or thing for inspection by court
or jury, or may of its own motion issue process for the production of
such person, witness, paper, document or thing, and may adjourn or
postpone the trial or hearing, or name a day for the further trial
or hearing, if the trial has begun, or if a hearing shall already have
been had, in order that such person, witness, paper, document or
thing may attend or be produced, upon such conditions in every case
as to time, notice, cost and security, as the court may deem proper.

This section referred to in deciding that a witness could not be asked by
plaintiff's counsel to refer to the defendant's books and state what entries
therein had reference to the transactions in suit, there being no evidence
that the books contained any material or relevant proof. Cooney v. Hax,
92 Md. 137.

Ibid. sec. 101. 1888, art. 75, sec. 96. 1860, art. 75. sec. 70.
1825, ch. 208, sec. 2.

101. At the trial of any suit instituted upon the bond of any clerk
or register for neglect of duty, it shall be the duty of the clerk or
register, when required, to exhibit to the court his dockets, records
and fee books, and the measure of damages shall be the sum. or sums he
has charged for services he has not performed, unless special damage
has been suffered by some person, and if so, the jury shall, in addition,
allow for such special damage.

Removal of Causes.

Ibid. sec. 102. 1888, art. 75, sec. 97. 1860, art. 75, sec. 74. 1805, ch. 65,
sec. 49. 1862, ch. 174. 1868, ch. 180. 1874, ch. 364.

102. The parties to any cause may submit the same to the court for
determination without the aid of the jury; and in all suits or actions at
law. issues from the orphans' court, or from any court sitting in equity.