Case ID: ky_16/html/0003-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

EASTIN vs. MICHIE.
    
      From the Bardstown District Court.
    
    The acts of assembly of Virginia permitting an action of debt to be brought on a bond for the payment of tobacco, will not authorise the maintaining of such action in Kentucky, for tobacco payable in Virginia.
    Note—The act of 1748, which first authorised actions of debt to be brought on such bonds, was not repealed until March 10th, 1798, (by an act passed the preceding February,) and the act of 1786, which, on this subject, is verbatim the same with the act of 1748, was not then repealed, and has not perhaps even yet been repealed; which shows that this decision was founded on a conviction of the incongruity of the remedy, in the events which had taken place.
   THIS was an action of debt, brought under the acts of 1748 and 1786, of Virginia, on a bond executed in 1787, in the penalty of 24,000lbs. of James river crop tobacco, conditioned for the payment of 12,000lbs. of like tobacco, of the inspections of Richmond, Manchester or Petersburg in the state of Virginia. After the separation of Kentucky from Virginia, viz. in 1793, the bond was assigned to Michie, who brought an action of debt on the penalty, in 1797, and obtained a judgment in 1798. The plea of payment had been put in, and issue joined on it, and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant prosecuted a writ of error, and on the 16th of May 1799, Chief Justice MUTER delivered the following opinion of the court.

The court is of opinion that there is error in the record and proceedings, in this, to wit, that an action of debt, either by the assignee or obligee of a bond for the payment of tobacco in Virginia, cannot be supported in the state of Kentucky.

Judgment reversed.