State v. Hasleps

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Hasleps

1 Wright 500, 1 Ohio Ch. 500

DecidedApril 15, 1834

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Wright 500 (State v. Hasleps) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Hasleps, 1 Wright 500, 1 Ohio Ch. 500 (Ohio 1834).

Pincite

Opinion

BY THE COURT.

There seems no intention to contemn the process of the court by this witness; on the contrary, he made an effort to obey, to the extent of his ability. The attachment is to punish for disobeying the process of the court wilfully, not to redress the party injured by the absence of the witness; for that injury he has his action. The defendant is discharged, at the costs of the applicant for the writ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BY THE COURT.

There seems no intention to contemn the process of the court by this witness; on the contrary, he made an effort to obey, to the extent of his ability. The attachment is to punish for disobeying the process of the court wilfully, not to redress the party injured by the absence of the witness; for that injury he has his action. The defendant is discharged, at the costs of the applicant for the writ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Wright 500, 1 Ohio Ch. 500, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hasleps-ohio-1834.