Case Name: ROGERS against BULLOCK
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1809-02
Citations: 3 N.J.L. 517
Docket Number: 
Parties: ROGERS against BULLOCK.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 109–110

Head Matter:
ROGERS against BULLOCK.
Witness, unless under subpoena, may be arrested when attending court,
A motion was made on the part of the defendant to be discharged from arrest, on the ground that he was [*] attending the trial of a cause in a county court as a witness. It appeared, however, that he had not [891] been subpoenaed. On the part of the defendant, it was argued, that if he was bona fide attending as a witness, it was immaterial whether he was subpoenaed or not; for which they cited 1 Dallas 439 ; 3 Dallas 183; 6 Bac. 376. On the part of the plaintiff, the act of Assembly, Pat. 1ft 1, was relied on.
S P. 6* Mass. 245. Salk. 544■ % John, 294

Opinion:
By the Court.
Whatever may be the practiee laid down in the books, our statute gives the rule. A witness, to be entitled to protection from arrest, must be necessarily attending court or going to or from it, under a subpoena "previously and duly executed."
It was also attempted to be made out, that although the defendant was not a party in the suit, yet that he was so connected with it, and had such a relation to it, as rendered his attendance necessary, and on that ground was entitled to privilege. This was not satisfactorily made out; and besides
The court said that it was repugnant to the idea held out of his being attending as a witness.
Rule refused.
Criticised in Dungan v. Miller, 8 Vr. 183.
Cited in Jones v. Knauss, 4 Stew. 213.