Brandreth v. Lance
New York Court of Chancery
This case came before the court upon the demurrers of Lance and Hodges, two of the defendants, to the complainant’s bill. 1 The complainant was the proprietor and vender of a nostrum known by the name of “ Brandreth’s Vegetable Universal Pills.”
Read the full summary
This case came before the court upon the demurrers of Lance and Hodges, two of the defendants, to the complainant’s bill. 1 The complainant was the proprietor and vender of a nostrum known by the name of “ Brandreth’s Vegetable Universal Pills.” And, as the bill alleged, by advertising this medicine extensively in the public papers in the state of New-York and elsewhere, and thus giving publicity to it and its general efficacy in the cure of diseases, the complainant had derived and was still deriving therefrom a comfortable support for himself and his family. The complainant also alleged…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
It is very evident that this court cannot assume jurisdiction of the case presented by the complainant’s bill, or of any other case of the like nature, without infringing upon the liberty of the press, and attempting to exercise a power of preventive justice which, as the legislature has decided, cannot safely be entrusted to any tribunal consistently with the principles of a free government. (2 R. S. 737, § 1, and Revisers’ note.) This bill presents the simple case of an application to the court of chancery to restrain the publication of a pamphlet which purports to be a…
2Cited by42 opinions
- Near v. Minnesota Ex Rel. OlsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- O'Neill v. Oakgrove Construction, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1988
- Marlin Fire Arms Co. v. . ShieldsNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- Kenyon v. City of ChicopeeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
- Koussevitzky v. Allen, Towne & Heath, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1947
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.