Hyatt's Admr. v. Chestnut
This text of 3 Ky. Op. 174 (Hyatt's Admr. v. Chestnut) 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 of the Court by
Chestnut’s object was evidently to defeat the impending attachment. He made the assignment only a few hours after he had knowledged of the Us mote, in the absence and without the knowledge of the assignee, who was well secured.
And the summons was served before the assignee, by delivery, acceptance or otherwise, had acquired any vested interest in the money attached. The attachment, therefore, has priority.
Wherefore, the circuit court erred in adjuding the money to Purcell instead of the appellant.
The judgment is, therefore, reversed, and the cause remanded for the judgment herein indicated as proper.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 Ky. Op. 174, 1869 Ky. LEXIS 332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hyatts-admr-v-chestnut-kyctapp-1869.