Wilder v. Shea
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 18 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL PROM CAMPBELL CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The act of March 15,1870 (under which this action is prosecuted), requires suit to be brought by equitable proceedings, and not in a court of law as this was. 2. That a garnishee, such as appellant, may answer by delivery of property or valuables of the defendant in his possession to the sheriff summoning him, or file his affidavit in court, or appear in open court for oral examination, at his election, and…
Read the full summary
Case 18 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL PROM CAMPBELL CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The act of March 15,1870 (under which this action is prosecuted), requires suit to be brought by equitable proceedings, and not in a court of law as this was. 2. That a garnishee, such as appellant, may answer by delivery of property or valuables of the defendant in his possession to the sheriff summoning him, or file his affidavit in court, or appear in open court for oral examination, at his election, and having done so he can not be compelled tó appear for oral examination when he has elected and answered otherwise. 3.…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE PBYOB
delivered the opinion op the court.'
The appellee Murty Shea instituted this action against the Louisville, Cincinnati & Lexington Railroad Company, on two bills of exchange drawn in his favor by its president, J. B. Wilder, on S. S. Eastwood its secretary, and accepted by the latter as such, payable at the Bank of Louisville. During the progress of the action a supplemental petition was filed, alleging an additional indebtedness to the appellee by the company, the entire claim amounting to about $3,000. The railroad company having been served with a summons, and making no defense,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Warren v. LelandMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
- Winchester & Lexington Turnpike Road Co. v. VimontCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1844
3Cited by1 opinion
- Mayo v. HansenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896