Paducah Land, Coal & Iron Co. v. Cochran

• Decision Date: 22 September 1896
• Parties: PADUCAH LAND, COAL & IRON CO. v. COCHRAN.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

37 S.W. 67

PADUCAH LAND, COAL & IRON CO. v. COCHRAN.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

September 22, 1896

Appeal from circuit court, McCracken county.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by Robert Cochran, assignee, against the Paducah Land, Coal &amp Iron Company. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Greer &amp Reed and J. W. Bloomfield, for appellant.

Helm &amp Bruce, for appellee.

DU RELLE, J.

Appellee Hays, sued the appellant for unpaid salary, and took out an attachment. Appellant denied its liability, and pleaded certain counterclaims and set-offs. Judgment was rendered for appellee, Hays, after allowing some of the set-offs. On appeal to this court, the case was reversed, with directions to the lower court to enter a judgment for appellee, but without one year's interest which had been allowed by the lower court. 24 S.W. 237. A motion was made for a judgment in pursuance of the mandate, and the motion was set for trial but no action was taken on the motion at that term. On a subsequent day of that term, the court ordered an amended answer, tendered by appellant, to be filed. Cochran, who had become the assignee of Hays, moved for a judgment in his favor as assignee, in accordance with the mandate, and an order was entered requiring him to file written pleadings setting up his claim. The assignee declined to file written pleadings. The motion of the assignee for judgment was overruled. Appellant moved to discharge the attachment. Appellee objected, and the court, suo motu, ordered that all of the orders entered that day be set aside. In the following vacation the assignee filed an amended petition, stating the fact of the assignment, and filing exhibits showing his appointment and qualification as assignee. Notice was given appellant of the filing of the amended petition and exhibits and that on the second day of the September term, 1894, the assignee would move to be substituted for Hays as plaintiff, and for a judgment in accordance with the mandate. The appellant appeared by counsel, filed an amended answer, counterclaim, set-off, and answer to the amended petition of the assignee, claiming damages for the alleged wrongful levy of the attachment, and setting off the judgment in its favor for costs in this court on the appeal. After hearing, the motion of the assignee was sustained, but the appellant's claim to set off the costs in this court was allowed. From the judgment...