Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

3 Yeates 438

Bayard v. Passmore

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 15, 1802

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1802-12-15

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.

Cited by 1 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1788

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1802-12-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the Court.

¶1The 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.

¶2Let the attachment go.

¶3*The defendant then submitted to answer interrogatories, [*441 and offered to give security for his appearance.

¶4By 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 defendant to consider well, what atonement he will make to the court as well as Mr. Bay-ard for the gross injury done to him by this publication.

/3/yeates/438 · .json · Public domain