Talk:The King v. Haas

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from The King v. Haas appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 April 2008, and was viewed approximately 976 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the decision of a Pennsylvania provincial court in 1764, The King v. Haas, is one of the first attempts to apply the writ of habeas corpus in the Thirteen Colonies?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2008/April.

Wikipedia

HOw?[edit]

Does the fact that this is in USR justify the use of the Supreme Court logo/infobox? The Court didn't even exist at the time! 76.117.247.55 (talk) 15:24, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a legitimate question, regarding which I've received very little guidance. As a lawyer and legal historian with an interest in American law of the colonial and pre-Constitution period, I started writing articles about these first cases -- or fragmentary case reports, as many of them really are. I wasn't sure what formatting to use, so I started with SCOTUS case template, complete with logo and infobox. The introductory text makes clear the actual original and court hearing the case. Less'n I hear a better idea, that's what I'm sticking with. Jim Simmons (talk) 20:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]