O'Donoghue v. Akin
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
CASE 35 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL MOM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT. cited 2 Rev. Stat., 509; Se.ss. Acts, 1865, p. 6. cited Const. Ky., art 3, sec. 37; 2 Met., 589; 4 Met., 293; 5 Mon., 133; 3 Call., 268, 286; 4 Bl.
Read the full summary
CASE 35 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL MOM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT. cited 2 Rev. Stat., 509; Se.ss. Acts, 1865, p. 6. cited Const. Ky., art 3, sec. 37; 2 Met., 589; 4 Met., 293; 5 Mon., 133; 3 Call., 268, 286; 4 Bl. Com., 312. cited Myers’ Sup., 681; 4 Met., 72; 3 Marsh., 489; Hard., 62; 4 Litt., 377; 10 B. Mon., 172; 3 Dali., 386; 7 Johns., 505; 2 Peters’ App., 681; Brae., lib.'4, fol. 228; 2 Just., 292; 2 Mod., 310; 2 Lev., 227. cited Rev. Stat., sec. 14, ch. 21; 5 B. Mon., 565; 2 Bouv. Law Die., 475; 1 Kent’s Com., 501; 3 Dali, 397; 7 Johns, 494; 6 Bac. Abr., 370; Co. Litt., 360. G, W. Craddock…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE ROBERTSON
delivered the opinion of the court:
Mary Ann O’Donoghue, on the 19th of January, 1866, brought this action against John Brent Akin for killing her husband unlawfully with a pistol in October, 1865.
The circuit court sustained a demurrer to the petition, and rendered judgment in bar of the action.
If, as the circuit court seemed to think, there was no law authorizing the appellant to recover damages for the imputed act, the judgment was right. And, in the opinion of this court, there was, when the homicide occurred, no such law. Right or wrong, it has been authoritatively adjudged…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Commonwealth v. StorySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Hudson v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 1980
- Howard's Admr. v. HunterCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1907
- Sturgeon v. BakerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1950
- Commonwealth v. StorySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.