Monroe v. Harkness
This text of 17 F. Cas. 605 (Monroe v. Harkness) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[This was a suit by Thomas Monroe, superintendent of the city, against Samuel Harkness.] Attachment for violating an- injunction. A rule granted yesterday, on complainant’s affidavit, to show cause why an attachment of contempt should not issue, for violating the injunction in proceeding towards completing a two-story wooden house. Upon further testimony in support of the rule it was made absolute, and an attachment was issued returnable immediately.
[Cited in Wilcox Silver-Plate Co. v. Schimmel, 59 Mich. 528, 26 N. W. 694.
[A similar attachment was issued against William Bradley. See Case No. 9,713.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
17 F. Cas. 605, 1 Cranch 157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/monroe-v-harkness-circtddc-1803.