§ 4135. Publication out of court.
(a) General rule.--Publication out of court respecting the conduct of judges, magisterial district judges,
other system or related personnel, jurors or participants in connection with any matter
pending before any tribunal shall not be construed as a contempt of court on the part
of the author, publisher or other person connected with such publication.
(b) Civil and criminal liability not affected.--If any publication specified in subsection (a) shall improperly tend to bias the minds
of the public, or of the tribunal, other system or related personnel, jurors or participants
in connection with any matter pending before any tribunal, any person aggrieved thereby
may proceed against the persons responsible for the publication by appropriate civil
action or criminal proceeding.
(Dec. 20, 1982, P.L.1409, No.326, eff. 60 days; Nov. 30, 2004, P.L.1618, No.207, eff.
60 days)
2004 Amendment. Act 207 amended subsec. (a). See section 29 of Act 207 in the appendix to this title
for special provisions relating to construction of law.
1982 Amendment. Act 326 amended and renumbered section 4134 to section 4135 and renumbered former
section 4135 to section 4136.
Notes of Decisions
Larsen v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc., 543 A.2d 1181 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1988).
· cites it 3× “; and Count VII rested upon a right of action purportedly existing in 42 Pa.C.S. § 4135 for the claimed defamatory publications by the appellees.”
Larsen v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc., 602 A.2d 324 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1991).
· cites it 2× “While holding that the amended complaint then under review did set forth a cause of action for invasion of privacy: false light against the news media defendants, we declined to find private, independent causes of action for alleged breach of the confidentiality provisions of…”
Commonwealth ex rel. Roth v. Kozakiewicz, 485 A.2d 843 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1984).
“2d 692 (1982), relating to that same section as formerly numbered, 42 Pa. C. S. §4135. Counsel for the defendant next points to 42 Pa.”
In the Interest of: E.O., a Minor (Pa. Super. Ct. 2018).
“See 42 Pa.C.S. § 4135 (in cases where person charged with indirect criminal contempt for violating restraining order or injunction, person may be punished by imprisonment in county jail of up to 15 days); see also Bruzzi, supra (recognizing this special subset of indirect…”
Eichenlaub v. Eichenlaub, 33 Pa. D. & C.3d 59 (1983).
· cites it 2× “Specifically, husband claims that 42 Pa. C.S. §4135 2 requires a jury trial for indirect criminal contempt for violation of a “restraining order or injunction”, hence, he must be afforded the right to a jury trial for indirect criminal contempt for his alleged violation of the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.