Mitchell v. Mattingly
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
CASE 41 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL PROM M’LEAN CIRCDIT COURT. The facts appear in the opinion of the court. 1. The circuit court erred in overruling the plaintiff’s demurrer to the answer. The defendant’s belief that the cause alleged for the attachment was true, is unavailing, unless there was reasonable ground to believe it true, which is not alleged. 2. The restriction imposed by the court upon the amount of damages is erroneous.
Read the full summary
CASE 41 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL PROM M’LEAN CIRCDIT COURT. The facts appear in the opinion of the court. 1. The circuit court erred in overruling the plaintiff’s demurrer to the answer. The defendant’s belief that the cause alleged for the attachment was true, is unavailing, unless there was reasonable ground to believe it true, which is not alleged. 2. The restriction imposed by the court upon the amount of damages is erroneous. Mattingly having committed a wrongful act injurious to appellant, and especially calculated to injure his credit, the law implies consequent damage, which the…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Simpson
delivered the otinion op the court:
Mitchell brought this action against Mattingly for having had an attachment issued and levied on his property without, as he alleges, the existence of any good cause, whereby he was put to great trouble and expense, and his credit injured and destroyed. He also alleges that the attachment thus wrongfully issued had been discharged by the court.
The defendant admits in his answer that the attachment had been issued, and dismissed by the court, but charges that the cause for its issual did, as he believes, actually exist, and was true. Pie denies that the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wood v. Weir & SayreCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1845
- Pettit v. MercerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1847
- Cox v. Taylor's AdministratorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1849
- Yocum v. PollyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1841
- Commonwealth ex rel. Clark v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1823
3Cited by9 opinions
- Commonwealth v. DiStasioMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
- Post & Co. v. Toledo, Cincinnati, & St. Louis RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Baxter v. MosesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1885
- MacPherson v. Boston Edison Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1957
- American Security & Trust Co. v. BrooksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.