Smith v. Brannin
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 23 — EQUITY APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. The division of this court upon the former hearing operates as an affirmance as to all questions upon which the division existed.
Read the full summary
Case 23 — EQUITY APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. The division of this court upon the former hearing operates as an affirmance as to all questions upon which the division existed. The judgment of the vice chancellor, therefore, stands as the law of this case upon all questions upon -which the court differed. • .(Gen. Stat., 279; Brannin v. Smith, MS. Opin., 1875; Commonwealth 'V. Beaumarchais, 3 Cal., 150; Phillips v. Williams, 3 Grattan, 264; .Brown v. Crow’s heirs, Hardin, 446; McLean v. Nixon, 18 B. Mon., 774; Mason v. Mason, 5 Bush, 193; Macklin v. Crutcher, 6 lb., 401.) We hold…
1Opinion of the Court
‘CHIEF JUSTICE COFER
delivered the opinion of the couet.
When this case was before this court on a former appeal, .it appeared that in December, 1865, A. B. Montgomery ••and John Wesley Hughes entered into a copartnership for the purpose of growing a crop of corn and cotton in the year 1866, on the plantation of the former, situated in Washington county, Mississippi known as the “Swift Water” plantation.
That contract provided, among other things, that Hughes ■should furnish the means for cultivating and securing the crop, and should advance to Montgomery the sum of $10,000. He was to be…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Davis v. McCorkleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1879
3Cited by4 opinions
- Wall's Exor. v. DimmittCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911
- Horton v. Louisville & Nashville RailroadCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1923
- Louisville Railway Co. v. OsborneCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
- Bassett v. BassettCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1918