City of Louisville v. Cassady
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 54 — APPORTIONMENT WARRANTS I. Breed’s testimony was incompetent, because he was not the custodian of the record. 2. The plea of res judicata barred plaintiff’s action against the city of Louisville. Citations: Burnett’s City Code, pp. 505-6, 509-510; Ky. Stats., sec. 2838. (Brief not in the record.) (Brief not in the record.) Citations: Johnson v. Ferrill, S Ky. Law Rep., 218; City of Louisville v. Cochran, 5 Ky. Law Rep., 833; Kendall v. Thomason, 2 Ky.
Read the full summary
Case 54 — APPORTIONMENT WARRANTS I. Breed’s testimony was incompetent, because he was not the custodian of the record. 2. The plea of res judicata barred plaintiff’s action against the city of Louisville. Citations: Burnett’s City Code, pp. 505-6, 509-510; Ky. Stats., sec. 2838. (Brief not in the record.) (Brief not in the record.) Citations: Johnson v. Ferrill, S Ky. Law Rep., 218; City of Louisville v. Cochran, 5 Ky. Law Rep., 833; Kendall v. Thomason, 2 Ky. Law Rep., 422; Shanks v. Stephens, 6 Ky. Law Rep., 525; Bogard v. O’Brien, 14 Ky. Law Rep., 648; Cooley on Taxation, p. 180; Becker v.…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE BURNAM
delivered the opinion of the court.
This suit was instituted by tbe Jackson Loan & Investment Company, as assignee of J. W. Cassady, against the owners of lots numbered from 700 to 774, inclusive, sit*426uate on both sides of Jefferson street, between Clay and Shelby, in Louisville, to collect certain apportionment warrants which had been issued by the city for the cost of sidewalks constructed under a contract between the city and J. W. Cassady made pursuant to an ordinance approved April 25, 1892.
The petition, as amended, contains the usual and necessary averments, the city of…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Stratton v. SyckCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1918