Legal Opinion

Hume v. Arrasmith

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided October 24, 1808PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION of the Court, by

Judge Bibb

-Hume declared against Arrasmith, stating that the plaintiff was of good fame, &c. and had been, and was the keeper of “ a public water grist-mill,” but that the said defendant, not ignorant, &c. had spoken of the plaintiff these words : “ John Hume (the plaintiff meaning) ijtole corn, and I (the defendant meaning) can prove it; he (the said plaintiff meaning) is a rogue and not fit to keep a mill.”—

To this the defendant pleaded not guilty, and also justified, and thereupon issues were joined.

The plaintiff to support his action, “ proved that the defendant…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Baker v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920
  2. Taylor v. MoranCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1862
  3. Renaker v. GreggCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1912
  4. Barr v. GainesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1835
  5. McGowan v. ManifeeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1828

1 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