Abernathy & Pinegar v. Myerbridges Coffee & Spice Co.

Decision Date22 March 1907
Citation100 S.W. 862
PartiesABERNATHY & PINEGAR v. MYERBRIDGES COFFEE & SPICE CO.
CourtKentucky Court of Appeals

HOBSON, J.

An unliquidated demand may be used as a set-off against a nonresident. Carson v. Carson, 2 Metc. 97; Taylor v. Stowell, 4 Metc. 177; First Nat. Bank v. Boyce, 78 Ky. 55, 39 Am. Rep. 198.

It is not averred in the answer that the plaintiff is a nonresident of the state. But the fact appears from the petition. On the original hearing this escaped our notice. As the plaintiff is a nonresident, the claim relied on by defendant for the conversion of the goods is allowable as a set-off.

The opinion heretofore delivered is extended as above indicated. The judgment appealed from is reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to the circuit court to overrule the demurrer to the answer.

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Hall v. Wilder Mfg. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 16 Febrero 1927
    ...Stevens 167 P. 010 [L. R. A. 1918B, 421]; McIntyre v. Forbes Piano Co., 100 Miss. 517 ; Arnold Carter, 125 Ga. 324 ; Abernathy v. Myerbridges Coffee Co. [Ky.] 100 S. W. 862; Pietrowski v. Czerwinski, 138 Wis. 96 ; Porter v. Roseman, 165 incl. 255 [74 N. E. 1105, 112 Am. St. Rep. 222, Ann. C......
  • Hall v. Wilder Manufacturing Company
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 16 Febrero 1927
    ... ... 517; Arnold v. Carter, 125 Ga. 324; Abernathy v ... Myer-Bridges Coffee Co., 100 S.W. 862; Pietrowski ... ...
  • Simons v. Douglas' Ex'r
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • 23 Noviembre 1920
    ... ... [225 S.W. 724.] ... Metc. 175; Abernathy v. Myers-Bridges Co., 100 S.W ... 862, 30 Ky. Law Rep ... ...
  • Strong v. Gordon
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • 5 Abril 1920
    ...167 P. 610; McIntyre v. Forbes Piano Co., 100 Miss. 517, 56 So. 457; Arnold v. Carter, 125 Ga. 319, 54 S.E. 177; Abernathy v. Myer-Bridges Coffee Co., 100 S.W. 862; Piotrowski v. Czerwinski, 138 Wis. 396, 120 268; Porter v. Roseman, 165 Ind. 255, 74 N.E. 1105; Ewing Merkle Electric Co. v. L......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT