Irvine v. Old Kentucky Distillery

Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)

Irvine v. Old Kentucky Distillery

271 S.W. 580, 208 Ky. 422, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 20

CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)

DecidedDecember 16, 1924

StatusPublished

This text of 271 S.W. 580 (Irvine v. Old Kentucky Distillery) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Irvine v. Old Kentucky Distillery, 271 S.W. 580, 208 Ky. 422, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 20 (Ky. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion op the Court by

Commissioner Sandidge

Affirming.

We are controlled in the settlement of the questions presented by this appeal by our opinion today, handed down in O. H. Irvine v. Old Kentucky Distillery and Joseph J. Sass. While the two cases were never consolidated, by agreement they were tried upon the same evidence. The facts'of the two cases differ only in that O. H. Irvine and R. H. Irvine owned different amounts of the capital stock of the corporation, with the consequent difference in the amount sought to be recovered. In the sale of the stock to appellee, Joseph J. Sass, O. H. Irvine acted both for himself and for his brother, this appellant, R. H. Irvine.

For the reasons indicated in the former opinion the judgment herein is affirmed.

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

Opinion op the Court by

Commissioner Sandidge

Affirming.

We are controlled in the settlement of the questions presented by this appeal by our opinion today, handed down in O. H. Irvine v. Old Kentucky Distillery and Joseph J. Sass. While the two cases were never consolidated, by agreement they were tried upon the same evidence. The facts'of the two cases differ only in that O. H. Irvine and R. H. Irvine owned different amounts of the capital stock of the corporation, with the consequent difference in the amount sought to be recovered. In the sale of the stock to appellee, Joseph J. Sass, O. H. Irvine acted both for himself and for his brother, this appellant, R. H. Irvine.

For the reasons indicated in the former opinion the judgment herein is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 S.W. 580, 208 Ky. 422, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 20, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/irvine-v-old-kentucky-distillery-kyctapphigh-1924.