Pope v. Forsee

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Pope v. Forsee

5 Ky. Op. 566, 1872 Ky. LEXIS 305

DecidedFebruary 9, 1872

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Ky. Op. 566 (Pope v. Forsee) 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

Pope v. Forsee, 5 Ky. Op. 566, 1872 Ky. LEXIS 305 (Ky. Ct. App. 1872).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Judge Peters :

We cannot from the evidence in this case conclude that at the time the summons was executed on Forsee he was the agent of the Memphis and Arkansas River Packet company, and that the service upon him of appellant’s summons is such a service on an agent as is contemplated by the 80 Section of the Civil Code.

The burden is on appellant to show that the facts exist to make the service of the summons on a person other than the defendant sufficient under the provision of the code supra, and we think in this case the evidence is not sufficient.

Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.

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

Opinion by

Judge Peters :

We cannot from the evidence in this case conclude that at the time the summons was executed on Forsee he was the agent of the Memphis and Arkansas River Packet company, and that the service upon him of appellant’s summons is such a service on an agent as is contemplated by the 80 Section of the Civil Code.

The burden is on appellant to show that the facts exist to make the service of the summons on a person other than the defendant sufficient under the provision of the code supra, and we think in this case the evidence is not sufficient.

Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Ky. Op. 566, 1872 Ky. LEXIS 305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pope-v-forsee-kyctapp-1872.