Newton v. Citizens' Bank of Shelbyville
| Decision Date | 15 December 1933 |
| Citation | 251 Ky. 790,66 S.W.2d 7 |
| Parties | NEWTON v. CITIZENS' BANK OF SHELBYVILLE. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Shelby County.
Action by Bailey W. Newton against the Citizens' Bank of Shelbyville. On plaintiff's motion for leave to appeal from a judgment dismissing the action.
Motion overruled.
J. S Luscher, of Louisville, for appellant.
Todd & Beard and H. B. Kinsolving, Jr., all of Shelbyville, for appellee.
The appellant, Bailey W. Newton, who was the plaintiff below instituted this action against Citizens' Bank of Shelbyville to recover six canceled checks. He alleged in his petition that he executed and delivered certain bank checks to the payees therein named wherein the defendant Citizens' Bank of Shelbyville, was named drawee, and that these checks, upon their presentation by the payees or their indorsers, were paid and canceled by the bank and the amounts thereof were charged to the account of the plaintiff. Plaintiff was a depositor of the defendant bank. Five of the checks were payable to third parties and the total amount for which they were drawn was $195.75. The sixth check was a counter check dated May 7, 1932, was for cash, and the amount for which it was drawn was $17.29. Plaintiff further alleged in his petition that the checks were of great and inestimable value to him and that he would suffer irreparable damage unless he was awarded possession of them.
The circuit court sustained a demurrer to the petition and entered a judgment dismissing it. The plaintiff has entered a motion in this court for an appeal.
This court is without jurisdiction to grant an appeal, since the amount in controversy is clearly less than $200. Section 950-1 et seq., Kentucky Statutes. A canceled check ordinarily has no pecuniary value. It is merely useful as written evidence of payment of a debt. Appellant insists, however that the relief sought is entirely injunctive; that in injunction proceedings it is not necessary that the amount involved be as much as $200 in order to give this court jurisdiction. He cites and relies upon Shackelford, Clerk, v. Phillips, 112 Ky. 563, 66 S.W. 419, 68 S.W. 441, 24 Ky. Law Rep. 154; Kentucky River Hardwood Company v. Noble, 168 Ky. 773, 182 S.W. 941; and Day v. Bauer, 215 Ky. 335, 285 S.W. 207. In each of the last two cited cases the action was brought to prevent the levy and collection of an execution, and in the first-cited case the judgment appealed from enjoined a sale under distress by virtue of a fee bill. In each of those cases it was held, and properly so, that the judgment was not one for the recovery of money or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McLean v. Thurman
...amount or thing in controversy is of such a tangible nature that its valuation reasonably may be shown. See Newton v. Citizens' Bank of Shelbyville, 251 Ky. 790, 66 S.W.2d 7; Charos v. Jent, 293 Ky. 50, 168 S.W.2d We may say in passing that if the amount or thing in controversy is translata......
- Newton v. Citizens' Bank of Shelbyville
-
Barnes v. Groves
...limiting our right to review a monetary judgment. Commonwealth v. Burnett, 274 Ky. 231, 118 S.W. (2d) 558; Newton v. Citizen's Bank of Shelbyville, 251 Ky. 790, 66 S.W. (2d) 7; Charos v. Jent et al., 293 Ky. 50, 168 S.W. (2d) While the quarterly court judgment may have been erroneous in awa......
-
Barnes v. Groves
... ... Commonwealth v. Burnett, 274 Ky. 231, 118 S.W.2d ... 558; Newton v. Citizen's Bank of Shelbyville, ... 251 Ky. 790, 66 S.W.2d 7; Charos v ... ...