Todd v. McClenahan
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Upon an appeal from a judgment of the Lexington District Court.
1Opinion of the Court
It is alleged as an error, that the declaration does not show the right of M’Clenahan to recover on the bond executed by the governor.
The court can not find any precedent on a case exactly similar to this; and it is believed that bonds of the kind have never been authorized by law in England. But it is a general rule of practice, “That the declaration must show a title in the plaintiff.” At common law, even had this bond been assigned to M’Clenahan, he could not have brought suit on it; therefore, it would have been necessary for him to have referred to the statute which permitted him to do…
2Cited by19 opinions
- French v. EdwardsSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. JasperCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1909
- Martin v. FortCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1897
- Heirs of Marr v. GilliamTennessee Supreme Court · 1860
- Dunham v. HarveyTennessee Supreme Court · 1902
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.