Opinion

Brown v. Daniels

  • 154 Ky. 267
  • 157 S.W. 3
  • 1913 Ky. LEXIS 36
Court
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Filed
Jun 5, 1913
Status
Published
Author
Carroll
On the bench
Carroll
Cited by
14 cases
Authority
More cited than 98.1%

The opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Carroll

Affirming.

This record of 262 pages involves the settlement of complicated accounts. There is no brief for appellee, but we have been favored by counsel for appellants with the following paper, styled “brief for appellants:”

“This action was originally brought in the Johnson Circuit Court by Grant Daniels, former sheriff of Johnson County against M. Y. Brown, deputy sheriff under him, and W. H. Dorton,' W. H. Estep and C. M. Thomas as his securities, wherein the said Daniels asked to recover from said Brown and his sureties the sum of $2,600 for taxes which this appellee claimed to be due from said Brown and his sureties as such.

“Brown answers and shows that he has paid to Daniels all the taxes due him for the four years as deputy, except- the amount then remaining uncollected on the tax-books, which he (Brown) offers to turn back to Daniels. The sureties of Brown make the same defense as Brown, except they have additional defenses, one of which that they are released as sureties because the bond they signed to Daniels as such sureties was never completed, in that other parties were to sign same. Other defenses are set out as will appear from a reading of the answer ' and the several amended answers.

“The case was referred to the master commissi,oner, • whose report was very favorable to Daniels. Exceptions were filed to the report by these appellants, and upon the trial of same, the report was substantially affirmed.

“This court is called upon to go over the entire settlement between these parties covering a period of four years and adjust their differences.”

When counsel for appellants do not point out in a brief any errors in the judgment appealed from or assign any reason why it should be reversed, this court, having neither the time nor the inclination to hunt for errors that might justify a reversal, will assume that the judgment appealed from is correct, and affirm it.

Judgment affirmed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.