Powers v. Sutherland
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
CASE 3 — FORCIBLE DETAINER cited Civil Code, sec. 1-61.' cited Civil Code, secs. 500, 502, 517.
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Duvall
delivered the opimion op-the court:
The appellee having been found guilty of a forcible detain-er, traversed the inquisition, and on the trial of the traverse, the circuit eourt, at the instance of the appellee, quashed the warrant, and refused to permit the appellants to file an “amended petition and warrant” offered by them. The appellants seek, by this appeal, to reverse that judgment.
First. The warrant was fatally defective in several particulars. It charges, in substance, that the defendant “ did, in the year 1859 and 1860, forcibly detain one house and field on the waters of the little…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Shinkle v. TurnerKentucky Supreme Court · 2016
- Mayhew v. Kentucky River Coal CorporationCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1931
- Tolbert v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
- Goebel v. Rogers Brothers Coal Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1927
- Citizens Coal Co. v. FoleyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1939
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.