Trapnall v. McAfee
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
CASE 11 APPEALS FROM MERGER CIRCUIT COURT. cited act of 1837, (3 Stat. Law, 12 ;) act of ■ 1838, (3 Stat. Law, 117;) 8 B. Mon., 51; Civil Code, sections 222, 223, 224; Taylor vs. McCracken, MS. opin., 1854; 14 B. Mon., 497; 1 Littell, 93. cited Civil Code, section 224; 6 B. Mon., 583; 8 B. Mon., 51 ; lb., 160; Taylor vs. McCracken, MS. opin., 1854; Yantis, ¿¡•c. vs. Burdett, 2 Dana.
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE STITES
delivered the opinion op the court :
These records present but one and the same question, and will be disposed of together.
Breed & Co., ^.nd Crutcher & Miller brought suits for debt against McAfee, and sued out attachments under the provisions of the Civil Code, (secs. 222, &c.) At the first term of the court after the commencement of the actions, on motion of McAfee, the attachments in both cases were discharged, and a judgment rendered in his favor against the plaintiffs for costs. There was no defense to the actions on the merits, but judgments were rendered in each case by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Pettit v. MercerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1847
3Cited by8 opinions
- Mansfield v. LynchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1890
- Foster v. BaileyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Marvel v. BabbittMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- First National Bank v. Truesdale HospitalMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
- Damron v. Sweetser, Caldwell & Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1885
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.