Legal Opinion

Wilson v. Thompson

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided June 29, 1858PublishedCited by 11 opinions

CASE 25 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL FROM MASON CIRCUIT COURT. The facts appear in the opinion of the court. Thompson is responsible for the debt because he concealed his agency, and thereby became personally liable. Ball is liable, because the contract of sale was really made with him, through his agent, Thompson. The appellants do not sue upon the note, which is regarded as a nullity because of Thompson’s fraud.

Read the full summary

CASE 25 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL FROM MASON CIRCUIT COURT. The facts appear in the opinion of the court. Thompson is responsible for the debt because he concealed his agency, and thereby became personally liable. Ball is liable, because the contract of sale was really made with him, through his agent, Thompson. The appellants do not sue upon the note, which is regarded as a nullity because of Thompson’s fraud. Wilson was the equitable owner of the debt, and consequently a necessary party plaintiff. (Civil Code, sec. 34; Carpenter vs. Miles, 17 B. Mon., 602.) All the necessary parties being…

1Opinion of the Court

JUDGE STITES

delivered the opinion oe the court:

Hawkins sold four slaves to Thompson for the sum of eleven hundred and eighty-five dollars, and executed to him a bill of sale with the usual covenants of soundness, &c. Thompson paid one thousand dollars down, and gave his due bill for the balance. This due bill Hawkins afterwards assigned to Wilson without recourse; and, the maker being insolvent, this action was brought by Hawkins and Wilson, as co-plaintiffs, against Thompson and Ball.

The petition, after setting forth the sale, execution of the *125note, and assignment, proceeds to charge that…

2Cited by11 opinions

  1. Stevenson v. DonnellyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915
  2. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Greenbrier Distillery Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
  3. Jones v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1874
  4. Loza v. OsmolaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  5. Dale v. DoddridgeNebraska Supreme Court · 1879

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API