Stephens v. Forsyth

14 Pa. 67, 1850 Pa. LEXIS 163
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided September 13, 1850·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

— Per curiam.

— A decree in equity produces its effect by controlling the course of the person, not by controlling a court of law, or any part of its machinery. A party may proceed at law, in the face of an injunction, and the court of law will adjudicate, if he will brave the consequences of the contempt. A court of chancery affects no superiority over any court of law whatever, or its officers; and pretends not to review their proceedings : so that the court, from which process has issued, is the only one to which the sheriff is answerable for the execution of it.

Decree affirmed.

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

Stephens v. Forsyth, 14 Pa. 67, 1850 Pa. LEXIS 163 (Pa. 1850).

14 Pa. 67 (Stephens v. Forsyth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth ex rel. Messing v. Messing
171 A.2d 893 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1961)
Rodney v. Drane
6 S.E.2d 818 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1939)