Shipp, for Use v. Doak
| Decision Date | 08 December 1925 |
| Citation | 211 Ky. 737 |
| Parties | Shipp, for Use, etc. v. Doak, et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
1. Compromise and Settlement — Court Not Inclined to Depart from Policy of Encouraging Agreement Among Adversaries. — Court of Appeals is not inclined to depart from the policy of encouraging rather than discouraging, agreement among adversaries.
2. Contempt — Settlement Between Sheriffs, Bondsmen, and Fiscal Court, After Remand of Taxpayer's Suit, Held Not Contempt. — In taxpayer's action against sheriffs, their bondsmen, and the fiscal court, to recover excessive sheriffs' commissions, that subsequent to remand by Court of Appeals for trial as against sheriffs and bondsmen, sheriffs, bondsmen, and fiscal court effected a settlement, without taxpayer's consent, held not contempt of Court of Appeals.
Motion for Contempt Rule.
N.B. HAYS for plaintiff.
HUNT, NORTHCUTT & BUSH, SPENCE CARRICK and HUMPHREY, CRAWFORD & MIDDLETON for defendants.
Dismissing petition and motion for contempt rule.
Some time ago the petitioner, Paul E. Shipp, suing as a taxpayer and citizen of Fayette county, instituted actions against two former sheriffs, their bondsmen and the members of the fiscal court. Special demurrers were sustained and the petitions dismissed. These judgments were reversed and the causes remanded. Shipp v. Bradley and Shipp v. Rodes, 196 Ky. 523, 245 S.W. 157. Upon return of the cases to the circuit court, general demurrers were sustained and the petitions were again dismissed Upon appeal these judgments were affirmed as to the members of the fiscal court but reversed as to the sheriffs and their bondsmen and the causes remanded for a trial on the merits as to them. Shipp v. Bradley and Shipp v. Rodes, 210 Ky. 51, 275 S.W. 1.
After the mandates had been filed and pending trial in the circuit court settlements of all matters involved were effected by the sheriffs and the fiscal court, and in accordance therewith each sheriff paid to the county, $10,000.00. Amended answers were then filed pleading these settlements in bar of the further prosecution of the actions.
Thereupon Shipp by this proceeding in this court in which he styles himself as plaintiff and the sheriffs, their attorneys and the members of the fiscal court as defendants, seeks a rule against each of them to show cause why they shall not be adjudged in contempt of this court by reason of such settlements.
It seems to be the theory...
To continue reading
Request your trial