Mulligan v. Harris
This text of 6 Ky. Op. 428 (Mulligan v. Harris) 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 by
While as a general rule it is true that a creditor who has the effects of an insolvent debtor in his hands will not be compelled to part with them until his debt is satisfied; yet in this case appellant, by his disavowal in his answer to Brown’s cross-suit against him,etc., and by his acquiescence in the appropriation of the funds, has precluded himself from the benefit of the rule.
By the terms in which appellant accepted appellees’ notice of the transfer of the residue of the debt on Brown he certainly waived his lien by failing then to apprise Harris of his claim, and place him in a condition to seek indemnity from. Murry, his assignor.
The judgment must therefore be affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
6 Ky. Op. 428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mulligan-v-harris-kyctapp-1873.