 | William Dickinson - 1820 - 922 sider
...jury ; " for Lord Mansfield, on a motion to quash an indictment against a Justice of the Peace for using such words, is reported to have said as follows:..." it must be a very strong case indeed, with very Jiagrant proof s of corruption, in which the court would grant an information against Judges acting... | |
 | William Dickinson - 1829 - 764 sider
...had addressed the grana jury as "a seditious, scandalous, corrupt, and perjured jury," that a judge of record cannot be put to answer civilly or criminally, for words spoken in office, (j) This, however, may well be doubted where the words, though spoken in the seat of office, and during... | |
 | Richard Burn - 1831 - 972 sider
...and perjured jury." Lord Mansfield, CJ, said : Neither party, witness, counsel, jury, or judge, can be put to answer, civilly or criminally, for words spoken in office. If the words spoken are opprobrious or irrelevant to the case, the Court will take notice of them as... | |
 | William Dickinson - 1841 - 1196 sider
...unprecedented. Lord Mansfield is reported to have said, " Neither party, witness, counsel, jury, nor judge, can be put to answer civilly or criminally for words spoken in office. If the words spoken are opprobrious, or irrelevant to the case, the court will take notice of them... | |
 | Great Britain. Courts, Frederick Augustus Carrington, Joshua Ryland Marshman - 1843 - 758 sider
...kind, to give them till next term to find any." " Neither party, witness, counsel, jury, or judge can be put to answer civilly or criminally for words spoken in office. If the words spoken are opprobrious or irrelevant to the case, the Court will take notice of them as... | |
 | William Dickinson, Thomas Noon Talfourd - 1845 - 1268 sider
...unprecedented. Lord Mansfield is reported to have said, " Neither party, witness, counsel, jwy, nor judge, can be put to answer civilly or criminally for words spoken in office. If the words spoken are opprobrious, or irrelevant to the case, the court will take notice of them... | |
 | Ireland. High Court of Chancery - 1861 - 682 sider
...defendant's Counsel) "has said ia "very just; neither party, witness, counsel, jury, or judge, can be " put to answer, civilly or criminally, for words spoken in office." In Hodgson v. Scarlett (a), the point decided by the Court was, that an action for defamation would... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of King's Bench, Thomas Flower Ellis, Francis Ellis - 1863 - 962 sider
...Mansfield, in delivering their judgment, said : "Neither party, witness, counsel, jury, or Judge, can be put to answer, civilly or criminally, for words spoken in office." Manisty (Aspinall with him) in support of the declaration. — [Cochlmrn C. 3. What do you say to the... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of King's Bench, William Mawdesley Best, George James Philip Smith - 1863 - 936 sider
...Mansfield, in delivering their judgment, said : "Neither party, witness, counsel, jury, or Judge, can be put to answer, civilly or criminally, for words spoken in office." Manisty (Aspinall with him) in support of the declaration. — \_Cockburn CJ What do you say to the... | |
 | 1889 - 546 sider
...observed in /«'ii, v. Skinner, Lofft, 56, that "neither party, witness, counsel, jury nor judge can be put to answer civilly or criminally for words spoken in office." Some refined distinctions were subsequently ingrafted on this doctrine, but they have been swept away,... | |
| |
The authorities establish beyond all question this: that neither party, witness, counsel, jury, nor judge, can be put to answer civilly or criminally for words spoken in office... 
