Andrews v. Andrews
New York Supreme Court
Ten. Broeck moved for an attachment absolute against a witness, on an affidavit that he was regftíarly summoned, and money tendered him for his expenses, which he did not object to for its insufficiency, tut positively refused to attend.
1Opinion of the Court
*Per Curiam.
Here is a strong case of palpable contempt, and, therefore, the court will award an attachment in the first instance. (1 Str. 1150. 1 Hen. Black. 49.) The sum of money tendered may, or may not, have been adequate, but as the witness did not object to it, at the time, it is to he considered sufficient.
Rule granted.(b)(b) In New York and Virginia, it has been decided that if a witness merely disobey a subpoena, the court will in the first instance grant a rule to show cause, &c. Jackson v. Munn, 2 Caines, 92. Morris v. Creel, 1 Vir. Cas. 333. If however the witness refuses to obey…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Butcher v. CoatsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1788
- Feree v. StromeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1793
- Jackson v. MannNew York Supreme Court · 1804
3Cited by1 opinion
- Norris v. HasslerUnited States Circuit Court · 1885