Holmes v. Stix, Krouse & Co.
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 46—EQUITY— APPEAL PROM ROBERTSON CIRCUIT COURT, 1. The appellees were not entitled to the appointment of a receiver. Douglass, &c., v. Cline, &c., 12 Bush, 608; Wooley v. Holt, 14 Bush, 788; Civ. Code, see. 299. 2. Holmes’ partnership lien was superior to that of the appellees. Hodges v. Holeman, 1 Dana, 50; Pearson v. Keedy, 6 B. M., 128; Wilson v. Soper, 13 B. M., 411; Bindley on Partnership, 779; Crooker v. Crooker, 83 Am.
Read the full summary
Case 46—EQUITY— APPEAL PROM ROBERTSON CIRCUIT COURT, 1. The appellees were not entitled to the appointment of a receiver. Douglass, &c., v. Cline, &c., 12 Bush, 608; Wooley v. Holt, 14 Bush, 788; Civ. Code, see. 299. 2. Holmes’ partnership lien was superior to that of the appellees. Hodges v. Holeman, 1 Dana, 50; Pearson v. Keedy, 6 B. M., 128; Wilson v. Soper, 13 B. M., 411; Bindley on Partnership, 779; Crooker v. Crooker, 83 Am. Dec., 509; Spalding v. Wilson, 80 Ky., 589; Lowe v. Lowe, 13 Bush, 688. 1. The appointment of a receiver in this action was proper on the ground “that the condition…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE GUFFY
deliveked tiie opinion of the court.
It appears from this record that Aris Throckmorton, Samuel Holmes, and the appellant, J. W. Holmes, entered into a partnership as a firm for the sale, by retail, of goods, wares, and merchandise in Mt. Olivet, Ky., under, the firm name of Throckmorton, Holmes & Co., and continued as such firm until 1891, at which time, by consent of the partners, the firm was dissolved, and the goods on *353hand divided; at least, appellant took a portion oí the goods, as he says, amounting to about $600, and the other two partners retained about $2,200 worth. It…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pearson & Anderson v. KeedyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1845
- Divine v. MitchumCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1844
- Spalding v. Wilson & MuirCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1883
- Seeley v. Mitchell's AssigneeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1887
3Cited by3 opinions
- Cox v. Guaranty Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1923
- McClure v. McGeeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1908
- Pendleton v. StrangeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1964