Legal Opinion

Kisten v. Hildebrand

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided January 3, 1848PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Error, to the Jefferson Circuit. Tavern keepers. Inn keepers. Bailments. Instructions. Case. Case 28.

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Marshall

This action on the case was brought to recover from Kisten, as an inn keeper, a large sum of money alleged to have ^een taken> through the default and negligence of the defendant, his servants, &c., from the trunk of the plaintiff, in the inn of the defendant, he [the-plaintiff, being then a guest therein. The form of proceeding against inn keepers in England, upon the custom of the realm, seems 1o have been substantially pursued. *73The declaration sets out as the foundation of the action, that “by the custom and law of this Commonwealth, inn keepers who keep common inns for entertaining men…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Dold v. Outrigger Hotel & Hawaii Hotels Operating Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Pinkerton v. WoodwardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
  3. Haff v. AdamsArizona Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Laird v. EicholdIndiana Supreme Court · 1858
  5. Langford v. VandaveerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1953

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API