Vermont v. New York

1972-06-26
Share:

Headline: Court appoints retired Justice R. Ammi Cutter as Special Master to run supplemental proceedings, allowing him to summon witnesses, take evidence, and require parties to share related expenses.

Holding: The Court appointed retired Justice R. Ammi Cutter as Special Master with authority to conduct supplemental proceedings, summon witnesses, take evidence, and allocate the Master’s expenses among the parties.

Real World Impact:
  • Allows a court-appointed official to summon witnesses and collect evidence.
  • Permits parties to be charged for the Special Master’s expenses and assistants.
  • Chief Justice can appoint a replacement if the Special Master leaves during recess.
Topics: court procedures, court-appointed official, evidence collection, litigation costs

Summary

Background

The Court granted a motion to file a bill of complaint and appointed retired Justice R. Ammi Cutter to serve as Special Master. The appointment gives the Special Master authority to manage supplemental proceedings in the case and to handle additional filings and procedures.

Reasoning

The order authorizes the Special Master to fix the time and conditions for filing additional papers, to direct subsequent proceedings, to summon witnesses, to issue subpoenas, and to take evidence as it is introduced or as he deems necessary. The Master must submit reports the Court finds appropriate. The Master may be reimbursed for actual expenses, and the Court directed that those costs, plus assistants’ pay and printing, be charged to the parties in proportions the Court will later set. The order also allows the Chief Justice to name a replacement if the Special Master position becomes vacant while the Court is in recess.

Real world impact

As a result, the parties in this dispute can expect further fact-gathering and formal evidence collection overseen by the Special Master. Parties may be required to respond to subpoenas and to bear portions of the Master’s expenses and support costs. This is a procedural step, not a final decision on the merits, and the Court may change details or allocate costs differently later.

Ask about this case

Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).

What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?

How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?

What are the practical implications of this ruling?

Related Cases