Legal Opinion

Crook v. Schumann

Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)

Decided February 19, 1943PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion op the Court by

Stanley, Commissioner

Dismissing cross-appeal.

Promptly after rendition of a judgment declaring-defendants to be in contempt of court, imposing fines and awarding plaintiffs certain relief pro confesso, the defendants filed a schedule on March 30, 1942, direetingthe circuit clerk to copy the entire record for the purpose of appeal, except the summonses. The appeal was perfected and the case docketed in this court under the style of Crook et al. v. Schumann et al. It appears as Case No. 1 on our Civil Docket for the Pall Term, 1942. The opinion in the case was delivered…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Brown v. VancleaveCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1887
  2. Crook v. SchumannCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1942
  3. Hibbard v. EstridgeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913
  4. Schumann v. CrookCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1943
  5. Roberts v. TurkCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1928

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Unnamed Attorney v. Attorney Grievance CommissionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
  2. Fortney v. Elliott's AdministratorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1954
  3. Louisville & N. R. v. Paul's Adm'rCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1951
  4. Schumann v. CrookCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1945
  5. Schumann v. CrookCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1943

1 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