Samuel Tucker and Samuel Schrader v. Margaret P. Cutler

185 F.2d 853
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 26, 1951
Docket15-1569
StatusPublished

This text of 185 F.2d 853 (Samuel Tucker and Samuel Schrader v. Margaret P. Cutler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Samuel Tucker and Samuel Schrader v. Margaret P. Cutler, 185 F.2d 853 (6th Cir. 1951).

Opinion

185 F.2d 853

Samuel TUCKER and Samuel Schrader, Appellants,
v.
Margaret P. CUTLER, Appellee.

No. 11153

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

October 13, 1950.
Writ of Certiorari Denied Feb. 26, 1951.

Davies & Hirschfeld, Newport, Ky., Daniel W. Davies, Newport, Ky., for appellants.

Elbert, Cook & Burke, Newport, Ky., Henry J. Cook, Newport, Ky., for appellee.

Before ALLEN, MARTIN and MILLER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was heard on the record, briefs and oral argument of counsel for respective parties;

And the Court being of the opinion that the Trial Judge was not in error in the construction which he gave to Section 372.040, Kentucky Revised Statutes, upon which appellee's cause of action was based; and

That the Trial Judge was not in error in refusing to give an instruction to the jury upon the defense alleged in the sixth defense of the answer, alleging connivance and comspiracy by appellee with her husband; Section 525, Carroll's Kentucky Civil Code of Practice; Orleans v. Platt, 99 U.S. 676, 678, 25 L.Ed. 404; Bird v. United States, 187 U.S. 118, 132, 23 S.Ct. 42, 47 L.Ed. 100.

It is ordered that the judgment of the District Court be and is affirmed for the reasons given by the District Judge in his opinions in the cases on the Covington, Kentucky Docket, styled Hartlieb v. Carr et al., D.C., 94 F.Supp. 279 and Salonen v. Farley et al., D.C., 82 F.Supp. 25.

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

Related

Orleans v. Platt
99 U.S. 676 (Supreme Court, 1879)
Bird v. United States
187 U.S. 118 (Supreme Court, 1902)
Salonen v. Farley
82 F. Supp. 25 (E.D. Kentucky, 1949)
Hartlieb v. Carr
94 F. Supp. 279 (E.D. Kentucky, 1950)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
185 F.2d 853, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/samuel-tucker-and-samuel-schrader-v-margaret-p-cut-ca6-1951.