Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Borger versus Searle, 1790 — 2 U.S. 110 · caselaw · US
General
Borger versus Searle
2 U.S. 1102 Dall. 110·Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·1790·PA
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Borger versus Searle.
ON a Capias returnable to the present term, Lewis this day moved for a rule to shew the plaintiff's cause of action, and why the defendant should not be discharged on common bail; offering, at the same time, to file an agreement, that the question might be heard before a single judge at his chambers.
Bradford
objected, that this being the last day of the term, the motion was out of season. He did not dispute the power of the Court; but he appealed to their discretion, whether it would not be unreasonable to suspend the cause for three months, by granting the rule at so late a period.
[MAJORITY — ' By the Court:]
' By the Court:
—The motion is certainly out of time. Before the return of the Capias, a question of bail may be brought; before a Angle judge; but after the return, it must be decided on an application to the Court; which ought to be made, on the first day, or, at least, within a reasonable period, after the commencement of the term. The prefent motion cannot, therefore, be granted.