Eubank v. Pence

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Eubank v. Pence

15 Ky. 338, 5 Litt. 338, 1824 Ky. LEXIS 107

DecidedJune 14, 1824

StatusPublished

This text of 15 Ky. 338 (Eubank v. Pence) 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

Eubank v. Pence, 15 Ky. 338, 5 Litt. 338, 1824 Ky. LEXIS 107 (Ky. Ct. App. 1824).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion of the Court,

by Judge Owsley.

THE inquest of a jury, taken under the writ of ad quod damnum, which issued in this case, not having aseertained whether or not fish of passage will in any ^eSree l,e obstructed, the court erred in ordering the mill seat to be condemned, and in giving permission to Pence to erect a mill.

The order must, therefore, be reversed with costs, the cause remanded to the court below, and the inquest the jury quashed, and such further proceedings there had, as may not be inconsistent with this opinion.

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

Opinion of the Court,

by Judge Owsley.

THE inquest of a jury, taken under the writ of ad quod damnum, which issued in this case, not having aseertained whether or not fish of passage will in any ^eSree l,e obstructed, the court erred in ordering the mill seat to be condemned, and in giving permission to Pence to erect a mill.

The order must, therefore, be reversed with costs, the cause remanded to the court below, and the inquest the jury quashed, and such further proceedings there had, as may not be inconsistent with this opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 Ky. 338, 5 Litt. 338, 1824 Ky. LEXIS 107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eubank-v-pence-kyctapp-1824.