State v. Gilpin
Court of Chancery of Delaware
Attachment eob Contempt.—This proceeding arose out of the case of Charles Tatem and James Can by vs. Joshua Gilpin and Thomas Gilpin,reported antep. 13. After a writ of injunction had been awarded in that case, in accordance with the order of the High Court of Errors and Appeals, an attachment for contempt against the defendants was granted, founded upon an affidavit charging them with a breach of the injunction.
Read the full summary
Attachment eob Contempt.—This proceeding arose out of the case of Charles Tatem and James Can by vs. Joshua Gilpin and Thomas Gilpin,reported antep. 13. After a writ of injunction had been awarded in that case, in accordance with the order of the High Court of Errors and Appeals, an attachment for contempt against the defendants was granted, founded upon an affidavit charging them with a breach of the injunction. The defendants being taken under the attachment and brought before the Chancellor, interrogatories were filed on the part of the complainants, Tatem and Canby, to be administered to…
1Opinion of the Court
Bidgely, Chancellor.
It is a general rule that where any motion or petition is made which is not of course, an affidavit of the facts alleged is necessary. 2 Harrison’s Ch. Pr. 1. According to the English practice,an affidavit of the service of a subpoena to appear is necessary before an attachment can go to enforce the appearance of a defendant. So, in contempt for not answering there should be a previous affidavit of the service of the subpoena to answer, according to the form of which it is stated, that the defendant was commanded to appear and put in an answer to the plaintiff’s bill.…
2Cited by8 opinions
- City of Wilmington v. General Teamsters Local Union 326Supreme Court of Delaware · 1974
- State Ex Rel. Buckson v. MancariSupreme Court of Delaware · 1966
- In the Interest of Watson v. GivensDelaware Family Court · 1999
- State v. NourisCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1927
- Sona v. Aluminum Castings Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.