Case No. 9,715.

MONROE v. HARKNESS.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 157.]¹

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Dec. Term, 1803.

INJUNCTION—VIOLATION—ATTACHMENT FOR CONTEMPT.

[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.]

¹ [Reported by Hon William Cranch, Chief Judge.]

This volume of American Law was transcribed for use on the Internet
through a contribution from Google.