Scott v. Hall
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Error to the Botjhbon Circuit. Ch.aíícerí', Case 57, The oasestatedi Decree of the Circuit Court. Statements and confessions of an assignor, made after the assignment of a note, are incompetent against the assignee. The testimony of a single witness against the positive denial of the answer, uncorroborated by circumstances, is insufficient to authorise any decree against the answer.
Read the full summary
Error to the Botjhbon Circuit. Ch.aíícerí', Case 57, The oasestatedi Decree of the Circuit Court. Statements and confessions of an assignor, made after the assignment of a note, are incompetent against the assignee. The testimony of a single witness against the positive denial of the answer, uncorroborated by circumstances, is insufficient to authorise any decree against the answer. The cases of Tudor vs Goodloe (1 B. Monroe, 324;) and Kenningham vs Bedford, (lb. 325;) and Pylce’s adm’r.vs Ciarle, (3 lb. 262,) cited and approved.
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Eiving
C. L. Timberlake and Scott and Bryan, and one B. M. Riggs, deceased, as his sureties, executed their note *286to Wm. W. Hall, bearing date the first day of February». 1839, and payable in one year, with interest from ther date, for money loaned. Timberlake agreed to pay a& the end of every four months, interest at the rate of twelve per cent, per annum, for the use of the money. Payments were made as stipulated, at, or some short time after the stated periods, up to the first of February, 1841. Previous to which, to-wit: in July, 1840, Wm, W. Hall assigned the note to Isaac F. Hall. A payment of…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Meiswinkle v. JungWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872