Nixon v. Jack
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
APPEAL FROM KENTON CIRCUIT. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court. Hep. We suppose the Kenton Circuit Court had jurisdiction of the case, under the 106th section of the Code. One of the defendants, Haven, resides in that county, and in that county Haven and Jack were served with process. That section provides : “That every other action may be brought in any county in which the defendant, ór one of several defendants resides or is summoned.”
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM KENTON CIRCUIT. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court. Hep. We suppose the Kenton Circuit Court had jurisdiction of the case, under the 106th section of the Code. One of the defendants, Haven, resides in that county, and in that county Haven and Jack were served with process. That section provides : “That every other action may be brought in any county in which the defendant, ór one of several defendants resides or is summoned.” The jurisdiction is undoubted, unless some other section requires the action to be brought in the county where the land lies. The…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Simpson
delivered the opinion of the Court.
This action was brought by the plaintiff, Nixon, in the Kenton Circuit Court. He alleged in his petition that he was the holder of a note for $3,019 03, which was executed on the 10th day of December, 1851, to Samuel Cloon, by the firm of James P. Jack & Co., and which had been assigned to him by Cloon the payee thereof; that at the time said note was executed the defendants, Jack, Goodall, Dean, and Haven, constituted the firm of Jack & Co., and that no part of the said debt had been paid. Pie also alleged that the firm of Jack & Co., owned a…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hargis v. HargisCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1941
- Noe v. BrockCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1936
- Stewart v. Troutman's Adm'rCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1877