Chaplin v. Hewlett
This text of 4 Ky. Op. 540 (Chaplin v. Hewlett) 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.
Opinion
Opinion op the Court by
The precise question involved in this appeal came before this court in Stone vs. Riddle, 5 Bush 349, and it was held in that case that as the county atttorney prosecuted the accused, and had his recognizance taken, which was forfeited, .and the default occurred before the enactment of “February 21, 1868,1 Sess. Acts 28,” but that the judgment thereon was subsequent thereto, and the county attorney having aided in recovering it in the circuit court, he was entitled to fifteen of the thirty per cent, allowed by previous enactment to Commonwealth attorneys. The appellant was, therefore entitled to fifteen of the thirty per cent, collected by appellee. Wherefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
4 Ky. Op. 540, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chaplin-v-hewlett-kyctapp-1870.