Restivo v. Church of Saint Joseph of Palisades

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “the ducking-stool” was an illegal punishment under “the humane provisions of the constitutions of the United Sates and of [Pennsylvania], as to cruel and unusual punishments”
• holding that ―the ducking-stool‖ was an illegal punishment under ―the humane provisions of the constitutions of the United Sates and of [Pennsylvania], as to cruel and unusual punishments‖

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).