Bank of the Commonwealth v. Hopkins

32 Ky. 395, 2 Dana 395, 1834 Ky. LEXIS 110
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedNovember 6, 1834
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 32 Ky. 395 (Bank of the Commonwealth v. Hopkins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bank of the Commonwealth v. Hopkins, 32 Ky. 395, 2 Dana 395, 1834 Ky. LEXIS 110 (Ky. Ct. App. 1834).

Opinion

Chief Justice Robertson

delivered the' Opinion of the Court.

To a petition and summons, brought by “the President and Directors of the Bank of the Commonwealth of Kentucky” against James S. Hopkins and others, the defendants pleaded that, prior to the institution of that suit, the same plaintiffs having sued -the same defendants, on the same note, and for the “same” cause of action, that suit was, by the judgment of the court, still remaining in full force and unreversed, ‘■'■dismissed agreed.”

The circuit court having adjudged that defence good, and the plaintiffs having failed to reply to it, judgment was.rendered in bar of this action.

The judgment of the circuit court was, in our opinion, right.

It has been frequently decided by this court, that the legal deduction from a judgment dismissing a suit “agreed” is that the parties had, by their agreement, adjusted the subject matter of controversy in that suit; and the legal effect of such a judgment’ is, therefore, that it will operate as a bar to any other suit between the same parties, on the identical cause of action thus adjusted by the parties, and merged in the judgment thereon rendered, at their instance, and in consequence of their agreement.

If, in such a case, the original cause of action has not been actually extinguished by payment, or other actual satisfaction, but was only transformed, by the agreement of the parties, into a new cause of action, the rena-.-. [396]*396edy must be on the latter, and cannot be maintained on the former and extinguished cause of action.

Wherefore, as the matter of defence has been aptly pleaded, the judgment of the circuit court must be affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Sharp v. Bannon
258 S.W.2d 713 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1953)
Farish v. Commissioner
2 T.C. 949 (U.S. Tax Court, 1943)
Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York v. Phillips
169 S.W.2d 132 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1943)
Merino v. City of New York Fire Insurance
35 P.R. 414 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1926)
Merino v. City or New York Fire Insurance
35 P.R. Dec. 451 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1926)
Green v. Commonwealth
204 S.W. 82 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1918)
Doan v. Bush
198 S.W. 261 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1917)
Burchett v. Scott
197 S.W. 397 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1917)
Lindsay v. Allen
112 Tenn. 637 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1904)
Bishop v. McGillis
51 N.W. 1075 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1892)
Murphy v. Creath
26 Mo. App. 581 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1887)
United States v. Parker
120 U.S. 89 (Supreme Court, 1887)
Kelly v. Town of Milan
21 F. 842 (U.S. Circuit Court, 1884)
Phillpotts v. Blasdel
10 Nev. 19 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1874)
Merritt v. Campbell
47 Cal. 542 (California Supreme Court, 1874)
Jarboe v. Smith
49 Ky. 257 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1850)
Alexander v. Walter
8 Gill 239 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1849)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
32 Ky. 395, 2 Dana 395, 1834 Ky. LEXIS 110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-the-commonwealth-v-hopkins-kyctapp-1834.