Paine v. Woolley
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 102 — EQUITY ON MOTION TO DISMISS. APPEAL. APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. 1. The judgment appealed from is a decree in chancery, and not a judgment at law. 2. The whole of the appellants’ claim is not denied by defendants’ answer, and the whole of it must necessarily be allowed pro confesso. 3. The entire issues in the lower court were upon 'the counter-claims and set-offs of appellees.
Read the full summary
Case 102 — EQUITY ON MOTION TO DISMISS. APPEAL. APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. 1. The judgment appealed from is a decree in chancery, and not a judgment at law. 2. The whole of the appellants’ claim is not denied by defendants’ answer, and the whole of it must necessarily be allowed pro confesso. 3. The entire issues in the lower court were upon 'the counter-claims and set-offs of appellees. Consequently, on this appeal appellants were defendants in the court below and appellees were plaintiffs. 4. Only parts of judgments appealed from are complained of, and these parts so complained…
1Opinion of the Court
'CHIEF JUSTICE HABG-IS
delivered the opinion oe the court.
This was a suit brought by the appellants upon an indivisible cause of action for the sum of $12,801.57.
The appellees admitted the receipt of that sum for the appellants as their attorneys, and in avoidance of the action, pleaded a counter-claim for their services as attorneys, amounting to $2,000 more than the sum sued for.
Issue was joined by appellants on the counter-claim, and a trial had, which resulted in a judgment in their behalf for the sum of $1,332.57.
Conceiving that the judgment in their favor was not •enough, the appellants…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bennett v. . Van SyckelNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Bradford v. BushSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
- Hall v. HrabrowskiSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
- Borgalthous v. Farmers & Merchants' Ins.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1873
- Campbell v. OrillionSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1848
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- McKain v. MullenWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1909
- Dunham, Buckley & Co. v. Randall & Chambers Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1895
- Jackson v. City of BrocktonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
- Madden v. MaddenCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
- Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.