Mengel Jr. Brother Co. v. Jackson
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 82 — MOTION— 1. This court has jurisdiction to issue the-writ. (New Constitution, secs. 109, 110; Arnold v. Shields,'5 Dana, 18; Sasseen v. Hammond, 18 B. M, 672; Preston v. Fidelity, &c., Co., 22 S. W. Rep., 319; Patton v. Stevens, 14 Bush, 329; Pennington v. Woolfolk, 79 Ky., 21; Turnpike Co. v. Phelps, 81 Ky., 616 ; Shinkle v. Covington, 83 Ky.; Vance v. Field, 89 Ky., 178, 184.) 2. The Legislature can not, under the new Constitution, confer upon the? criminal branch…
Read the full summary
Case 82 — MOTION— 1. This court has jurisdiction to issue the-writ. (New Constitution, secs. 109, 110; Arnold v. Shields,'5 Dana, 18; Sasseen v. Hammond, 18 B. M, 672; Preston v. Fidelity, &c., Co., 22 S. W. Rep., 319; Patton v. Stevens, 14 Bush, 329; Pennington v. Woolfolk, 79 Ky., 21; Turnpike Co. v. Phelps, 81 Ky., 616 ; Shinkle v. Covington, 83 Ky.; Vance v. Field, 89 Ky., 178, 184.) 2. The Legislature can not, under the new Constitution, confer upon the? criminal branch of the Jefferson Circuit Court power to try civil cases. (New Constitution, sec. 137; “An act concerning circuit courts…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE LEWIS
DELIVERED THE OPINION OF THE COURT.
It appears that September 19, 1892, the City of Louisville filed in the Jefferson Circuit Court, Law and Equity Branch, a petition praying for judgment determining whether C. C. Mengel Jr. Brother Company, and others made defendants to the action, will be damaged on account of the making by the plaintiff of a certain public improvement; if so, to-what extent, and also that the right to erect and maintain that improvement is vested in plaintiff. But April 26, 1893, the following order was made: “The Hon. Sterling B. Toney, Judge of the Jefferson…
2Cited by2 opinions
- James v. CammackCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1910
- James v. CammackCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1910