Rooney v. Commonwealth
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 59 — INDICTMENT APPEAL PROM LAUREL CIRCUIT COURT. I. The demurrer to the indictment should have been sustained because of its failure to allege that the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company was a corporation, and had authority to' operate in this State. , 2. The evidence of the witness, Johnson, with reference to the printed rules of the company, which were not produced on the trial, was certainly incompetent.
Read the full summary
Case 59 — INDICTMENT APPEAL PROM LAUREL CIRCUIT COURT. I. The demurrer to the indictment should have been sustained because of its failure to allege that the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company was a corporation, and had authority to' operate in this State. , 2. The evidence of the witness, Johnson, with reference to the printed rules of the company, which were not produced on the trial, was certainly incompetent. Greenleaf on Evidence, vol. 1, secs. 8 to 13. 1. The indictment follows the language of the statute, and is good without further description of the offense. 88 Ky., 350; 13…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE GUFFY
delivebed the opinion of the coubt.
The appellant was indicted, tried and convicted under the following indictment; “The grand jury of Laurel county, in the name and by the authority of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, accuse John Rooney of the crime of willfully and maliciously tearing up, displacing, breaking and disturbing a fixture attached to the track and switch of a railroad in operation, whereby the engine and cars on said railroad might be upset, arrested and thrown from the track and switch of said road, committed in manner and form as follows, viz.; The said John Rooney did,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Burlew v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New YorkCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1938
- Bruch v. Glow Electric Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920