Dunn's Trustee v. McAlpin & Co.
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 11 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL FROM MADISON CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The proof does not sustain the allegation that there was “no property in this State subject to execution, or not enough - thereof to satisfy plaintiff’s claim.” (9 Ky.
Read the full summary
Case 11 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL FROM MADISON CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The proof does not sustain the allegation that there was “no property in this State subject to execution, or not enough - thereof to satisfy plaintiff’s claim.” (9 Ky. Law Rep., 765.) The provision of the Code under which the attachment in this case was issued should either be limited to a case where there is only one obligor, or, if there is more than one, the allegation and proof should show that the property subject to execution, owned by all the obligors together, did not, in the aggregate, amount to as much as plaintiff’s…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE BENNETT
delivered the opinion of the court.
R. G. Dunn and J. O. Dunn were sued and served with process as co-obligors on a note for two thousand one hundred dollars, executed to the appellees. An attachment was obtained against the property of R. G. Dunn alone, upon grounds alleged against him .alone, which were, that said Dunn had “no property in this State subject to execution, or not enough *80thereof to satisfy the plaintiff’s (appellee’s) demand, and the collection of the demand will be endangered by delay in obtaining judgment, or a return •of no property found.”
Subsection 2, section…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Wilks v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- Lewis v. BrowningCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1928
- Moors v. Kentucky Electrical Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919
- Downs v. RinggoldCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1897
- Simms v. RamseyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1916
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.