Legal Opinion

In re Boeshore

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

Decided October 30, 1903No. 14PublishedCited by 2 opinions

On Rule for Attachment of Witness.

1Opinion of the Court

J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.

Under section 4906 of the Revised Statutes [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3390] the respondent was duly subpoenaed to appear as a witness before a notary public in the city of Philadelphia to testify in a contested interference proceeding pending before the Patent Office. He failed to appear, and a rule to show cause why an attachment should not issue was thereupon granted. The respondent’s answer sets up, among other excuses, that the process served “did not at said time pay or offer to pay to deponent his car fare or expenses to the hearing referred to, nor did he…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Norris v. HasslerUnited States Circuit Court · 1885
  2. Hurd v. SwanNew York Supreme Court · 1847
  3. United States v. DurlingDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1869
  4. In re ThomasU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kansas · 1871

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Corcoran v. CarrauWashington Supreme Court · 1905
  2. In re KerberDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1903

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API