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.
The King v. Haas and others, 1764 — 1 U.S. 9 · caselaw · US
General
The King v. Haas and others
1 U.S. 91 Dall. 9·Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·1764·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
The King v. Haas and others.
Practice on indictment.
[MAJORITY]
Moved on the part of the defendant, to oblige the attorney-general to bring on the trial, or discharge the defendant. The Court said, they would not force the Crown to bring on the *trial, nor. discharge the defendant from bail, without some appearance of oppression,
But see the Habeas Corpus act of 18th February 1785. (2 Sm. Laws, 277.) And see the case of Commonwealth v. Prophet, 1 Bro. 135.