Norton & Williams v. Roberts & Latham
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Chancery. Error to the Loran Circuit; Henry P. Broadnax Judge. Principal and surety — and creditor. Bill quia timet. Equity jurisdiction.
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Bibb
Tub facts upon which the decree, in favor of Roberts and Latham, (the complainants in chancery) is based, are clear by confession and proof.
In 1818, Norton and Williams, partners in trade, sold to Armstead Morehead, a lot of ground in Russelville, and obtained in payment the note of Morehead, with John Roberts and John Latham his securities, jointly bound with him, for two thousand five hundred dollars, payable and negotiable at Russelville Branca Bank, at nine months from the 18th of August.
On the first of May, 1819, Norton and Williams caused tins note to be presented and protested at Bank…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jones v. BullockCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1814