Swift's v. Donahue
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 18 — ACTION FOR CONTRIBUTION APPEAL PROM PXEMING CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The petition stated a cause of action. It was not necessary to allege an assignment by the United States to the appellant of the judgments obtained against the sureties. It was an action for contribution and not an action to enforce the judgments.
Read the full summary
Case 18 — ACTION FOR CONTRIBUTION APPEAL PROM PXEMING CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The petition stated a cause of action. It was not necessary to allege an assignment by the United States to the appellant of the judgments obtained against the sureties. It was an action for contribution and not an action to enforce the judgments. Chenault, Receiver, v. Bush, 84 Ky., 528. The statute upon assignment of judgments to the surety is to enable him to control the process which might issue for the enforcement of the judgment. Nor was it necessary for the petition to allege that the plaintiffs had executed the…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Lewis
As appears from tlie allegations of the petition in this case, to which a general demurrer was sustained, in 1869 Samuel McKee, having been appointed pension agent of the United States in Kentucky, executed a bond for the faithful discharge of the duties of his office, with John Donahue, George Hazelrigg, John R. Lawson, Alexander Swift, and others as his sureties. McKee having proved a defaulter, the United States, in July, 1884, instituted an action, in the Circuit Court of theUnited States for the District of Ohio, in which, however, only Alexander Swift and H. S. Bundy, two of the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Thomas v. Green CountyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1908
- Ritchie v. PaineCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1968