Miller v. Henshaw & Co.
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Chancery. From the Circuit Court for Jefferson County, Statement of the case. When an accepted bill is taken np by the drawer, he acquires a perfect right to |ue the acceptor in his own name: Subsequent parties have no further interest in the matter, and are not proper parties to any suit in chancery founded upon it.
Read the full summary
Chancery. From the Circuit Court for Jefferson County, Statement of the case. When an accepted bill is taken np by the drawer, he acquires a perfect right to |ue the acceptor in his own name: Subsequent parties have no further interest in the matter, and are not proper parties to any suit in chancery founded upon it. An allegation by pompl’ts, drawers of a bill, that they took it up, not being denied by the acceptor, jnust be taken as [rue against him; and the production of the bill & protest by” the drawers, is sufficient (in the absence of proof jo the contrary) against other par ties who…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Marshall
delivered the Opinion of the Court.
This case presents a contest between creditors contending for a priority of lien upon the property of A. G. Henry, their common debtor.
On the 19th of September, 1832, Henshaw & Co. filed their bill in the Jefferson Circuit Court, setting up two bills of exchange which had been drawn by them and accepted by A. G. Henry, for nine hundred and five dollars forty cents each, and payable to D. Henshaw, by whom they were endorsed over. The bill alleges that Plenry failed to pay the bills at maturity; that they were regularly protested, and afterwards…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dugan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1818
3Cited by2 opinions
- Salisbury v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1934
- Starr Piano Co. v. PetreyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916