Legal Opinion

Rudd v. Deposit Bank of Owensboro

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided January 26, 1899PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Case 56 — ACTION ON NOTE 3. The judgment against Slack is an individual one. This was erroneous. Fultz v. Fox, 9 B. M., 502; Beaumont v. Miller, 1 Met., 71; Graham v. Samuel, 1 Dana, 166; Rogers v. Bradford, 8 Bush, 165; Horton v. Garrison (Texas), 20 S. W., 773. 2. As against W. M. Rudd, J. C. Rudd and John Murphy, the petition is defective in failing to aver a promise to pay.

Read the full summary

Case 56 — ACTION ON NOTE 3. The judgment against Slack is an individual one. This was erroneous. Fultz v. Fox, 9 B. M., 502; Beaumont v. Miller, 1 Met., 71; Graham v. Samuel, 1 Dana, 166; Rogers v. Bradford, 8 Bush, 165; Horton v. Garrison (Texas), 20 S. W., 773. 2. As against W. M. Rudd, J. C. Rudd and John Murphy, the petition is defective in failing to aver a promise to pay. HufEaker, &c., v. National Bank of Monticello, 12 Bush, 287; Chitty on Pleading, 301-2; Same, p. 363 and vol. 2, p. 388. 3. The petition fails to state plaintiffs act of incorporation. Zable v. Louisville Baptist…

1Opinion of the Court

JUDGE BURNAM

delivered the opinion of the court.

These two appeals involve the determination of the same points. They are from judgments rendered in suits *445instituted by appellee to recover of William Rudd, as drawer, John Murphy, as indorser, and R. W. Slack, agent for the Rudd estate, as acceptor, certain bills of exchange, which had been protested for nonpayment. The same defenses were made in both suits by R. W. Slack, as agent for the Rudd estate, and John Murphy. Slack, as agent for the Rudd estate, answers as acceptor, and says that, before he qualified as agent for that estate, the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Young, McDowell & Co. v. BennettCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1870

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Demelman v. BrazierMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  2. United Mine Workers of America v. CromerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
  3. Hall v. Cumberland Pipe Line Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1922
  4. Jones v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  5. Commonwealth v. ReddCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1922

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API