Davis v. Morton
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
CASE — 41—PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. CITED— 3 McLean, 221; ex parte Balch. 4 McLean, 535; Hacker vs. Slevins. 1 Connecticut, 154; Hart vs. Granger. Civil Code, sec. 120, sub-sec. 3, and sec. 123. , CITED— MSS. Opn., Jan., 1857; McMicken vs. Hammond. 2 Parsons on Contracts, Ath ed.,p. 232. Story's Conflict of Laws, sec. 610, n. a. 9 Johnson, 221; Brown vs. Seymour.. 12 Johnson, 99 ; 3 McCord, 38. 13 Ills., 486; 5 De.
Read the full summary
CASE — 41—PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. CITED— 3 McLean, 221; ex parte Balch. 4 McLean, 535; Hacker vs. Slevins. 1 Connecticut, 154; Hart vs. Granger. Civil Code, sec. 120, sub-sec. 3, and sec. 123. , CITED— MSS. Opn., Jan., 1857; McMicken vs. Hammond. 2 Parsons on Contracts, Ath ed.,p. 232. Story's Conflict of Laws, sec. 610, n. a. 9 Johnson, 221; Brown vs. Seymour.. 12 Johnson, 99 ; 3 McCord, 38. 13 Ills., 486; 5 De. G. C. S., 95. Stewart's Lower Ganada R., 558. 3 Swanst., 703; 2 Curtis C. C., 559; 17 Mass., 197. 10 Eng. Law and Equity R., 250.
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE ROBERTSON
delivered the opinion op the court:
The appellees sued the appellant in the Louisville chancery court for the amount due by him to them as holders of a protested bill of exchange drawn by him in Memphis, *443Tennessee, and payable there, for about one thousand one hundred and sixty-six dollars, and, on the execution of the proper bond, procured process of arrest, of garnishment and attachment. Under that process the appellant was arrested, and afterwards liberated on the execution of an approved bail bond for securing the debt; and, having-appeared in the suit, he answered, not…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Salmon v. WoottonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1840
3Cited by5 opinions
- STANTON v. Embrey, AdministratorSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Wilson v. MillikenCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1898
- Dotson's Adm'r v. FerrellCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1942
- White v. WhitneyNebraska Supreme Court · 1903
- Central Railroad v. N. J. West Line RailroadNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1880