Curle v. Moor
This text of 31 Ky. 445 (Curle v. Moor) 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
deliverer! the Opinion of the Court— in which Judge Nicholas did not concur.
As the plea in this case may he deemed a plea in bar, though not sufficient as a plea in ahátement, and as the matter pleaded may, if available at all, bar the action in this state — the only question for consideration, is the matter of the plea ; and that is, whether a foreign administrator, who was never qualified in this state, is liable, as administrator, to an action at law in any court of this commonwealth. It is the opinion of a majority of [446]*446the court, (Judge Nicholas dissenting,) that he is not liable to such a suit, according to the common law, or in virtue of any statutory modification of it. And that, if ^íere he any remedy against him here, it is a suit in chancery, on appropriate facts shewing a right in equity to maintain a suit.
Wherefore, as the opinion accords with that of the circuit court, the judgment which this writ of error seeks to reverse, must be affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
31 Ky. 445, 1 Dana 445, 1833 Ky. LEXIS 120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curle-v-moor-kyctapp-1833.