Bayard v. Passmore
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
A rule to shew cause why an attachment should not issue against the defendant, for a contempt in making a certain publication, was obtained at the last term, on the following affidavits.
Read the full summary
A rule to shew cause why an attachment should not issue against the defendant, for a contempt in making a certain publication, was obtained at the last term, on the following affidavits. James Kitchen made oath, that on the 8th September 1802, Thomas Passmore affixed the paper annexed to his affidavit, (a copy of which hereafter follows,) to a board in the exchange room in the city tavern, and watered the same to the board, in the manner advertisements are usually posted up. *Andrew Bayard made oath, that the paper annexed r* was wrote by Thomas Passmore ; that the contents of the ^ 439 said…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The implication is irresistible, that the publication referred to the suit then under the cognizance of the court. It was an attempt to prejudice the public mind in a cause then depending, and was in the eye of the law a contempt of the court.
Let the attachment go.
*The defendant then submitted to answer interrogatories, [*441 and offered to give security for his appearance.
By the Court. Let him enter in to recognizance, himself in 300 dollars, and one sufficient surety in the like sum, conditioned for his appearance de die in diem to answer, &c. And in the mean while it behoves the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- United States v. BarnettSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Respublica v. OswaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1788
- Cheadle v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
- Hawley v. BibbSupreme Court of Alabama · 1881
- Brua's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1867
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.