Gill v. Webb's administrator

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Gill v. Webb's administrator

20 Ky. 299, 4 T.B. Mon. 299, 1827 Ky. LEXIS 19

DecidedApril 6, 1827

StatusPublished

This text of 20 Ky. 299 (Gill v. Webb's administrator) 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

Gill v. Webb's administrator, 20 Ky. 299, 4 T.B. Mon. 299, 1827 Ky. LEXIS 19 (Ky. Ct. App. 1827).

Pincite

Opinion

Chief Justice Bibb

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

The assignor, Chism, won money of Brown, at cards, and at the same time Brown won money of the decedent, Webb, at cards, upon these considerations, the decedent, Webb, executed his note for $250, to Chism, who assigned it to Gill. -Webb paid S140 to Gill, and for the residue, a judgment at law was obtained by Gill, against the maker of the note. The administrator of Webb exhibited his bill, for relief against the judgment, and to recover back from Gill the money received.

So much of the decree as enjoins the judgment at law, for the sum unpaid, with cost, is approved; but so much of the decree as orders Gill, the assignee, to refund the sum by him received, is disapproved, because it is contrary to the.principle of the case of Downs vs. Quarles and Crittenden. Litt. Sel. Cas. 489.

It is. therefore, decreed and ordered that the said decree be reversed in part, and affirmed in part, and the cause is remanded to the circuit court, with directions to that court to reform the decree according to the foregoing opinion, — and it is further decreed and ordered, that the defendant pay to the plaintiff, bis costs in this court, in this behalf expended.

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

Chief Justice Bibb

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

The assignor, Chism, won money of Brown, at cards, and at the same time Brown won money of the decedent, Webb, at cards, upon these considerations, the decedent, Webb, executed his note for $250, to Chism, who assigned it to Gill. -Webb paid S140 to Gill, and for the residue, a judgment at law was obtained by Gill, against the maker of the note. The administrator of Webb exhibited his bill, for relief against the judgment, and to recover back from Gill the money received.

So much of the decree as enjoins the judgment at law, for the sum unpaid, with cost, is approved; but so much of the decree as orders Gill, the assignee, to refund the sum by him received, is disapproved, because it is contrary to the.principle of the case of Downs vs. Quarles and Crittenden. Litt. Sel. Cas. 489.

It is. therefore, decreed and ordered that the said decree be reversed in part, and affirmed in part, and the cause is remanded to the circuit court, with directions to that court to reform the decree according to the foregoing opinion, — and it is further decreed and ordered, that the defendant pay to the plaintiff, bis costs in this court, in this behalf expended.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 Ky. 299, 4 T.B. Mon. 299, 1827 Ky. LEXIS 19, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gill-v-webbs-administrator-kyctapp-1827.