Worthington v. Miller's Adm'r
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 45 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL PROM KENTON CIRCUIT COURT. After judgment was rendered against Whipps he was a competent witness for appellant to prove payment. The reversal of the judgment upon Worthington’s appeal did not affect Whipps. 1. The question as to the competency of Whipps’ testimony was settled upon the first appeal in this case, and can not be reopened.
Read the full summary
Case 45 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL PROM KENTON CIRCUIT COURT. After judgment was rendered against Whipps he was a competent witness for appellant to prove payment. The reversal of the judgment upon Worthington’s appeal did not affect Whipps. 1. The question as to the competency of Whipps’ testimony was settled upon the first appeal in this case, and can not be reopened. (Miller’s Adm’r v. Worthington, &c., MS. Op., March 20, 1879.) 2. The reversal of the judgment upon Worthington’s appeal operated as a reversal as to both defendants, the judgment being an entirety, and a new trial was had as…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Pryor
This case has been heretofore in this court, once on the appeal of Miller’s administrator, and once on the appeal of Worthington, and is now here for the third time. The action was instituted by the administrator of Miller on the following obligation : “Une John I. Miller, two hundred and thirty-five dollars and forty cents. James Whipps & Co.” The action being against the firm of James Whipps & Co., the petition alleging that James Whipps and Henry Worthington were members, and that Wilcox, the other member, was dead or had retired *321from the firm. Worthington denied by his answer the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Cain v. LevyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1918
- Farris' Executors v. BlueCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1928