Crosthwaite v. Wigner

4 Ky. Op. 658, 1872 Ky. LEXIS 127
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedJanuary 13, 1872
StatusPublished

This text of 4 Ky. Op. 658 (Crosthwaite v. Wigner) 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
Crosthwaite v. Wigner, 4 Ky. Op. 658, 1872 Ky. LEXIS 127 (Ky. Ct. App. 1872).

Opinion

Response by

Judge Lindsay:

It is not necessary in these cases for this court to express an opinion, as to whether the purchase by the plaintiff from Hunter, of the notes sued on, vested him with the title to the same. If the plaintiff was carrying on the business of broker without paying the' license required by the federal government, and this fact, as contended by appellant, rendered his business transactions vicious, then it might follow that he could not have enforced his. contract of purchase as against Hunter. But this contract has been fully executed, and Hunter is not complaining. The [659]*659■sale of the notes, if void, leave's the title in Hunter, but does not ■discharge appellants of their obligation to pay him.

Gibbons & Falconer, for appellant. Browne, for appellees.

Hpon the face of the .record appellee appears to be the owner of the notes. If, as matter of law, they belong to Hunter, appellants should have ashed to have him made a party to the suits. As the record stands, the payment of this judgment will protect them against Hunter. They therefore have no ground of complaint.

Petition overruled.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Ky. Op. 658, 1872 Ky. LEXIS 127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crosthwaite-v-wigner-kyctapp-1872.