Johnson's adm'r v. Hunt
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 49 — ORDINARY APPEAL PROM WARREN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. Neither the original nor amended answer avers that the services performed by appellee were accepted by the decedent in satisfaction of the note held against appellee by the decedent for $5,000. 2. But the contract relied upon by the appellee, that he was to give his aid and influence in inducing a young lady to marry his grandfather, and that, in consideration thereof, the latter was to surrender to appellee his note…
Read the full summary
Case 49 — ORDINARY APPEAL PROM WARREN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. Neither the original nor amended answer avers that the services performed by appellee were accepted by the decedent in satisfaction of the note held against appellee by the decedent for $5,000. 2. But the contract relied upon by the appellee, that he was to give his aid and influence in inducing a young lady to marry his grandfather, and that, in consideration thereof, the latter was to surrender to appellee his note for $5,000, is vicious, and cannot be sustained. Such contracts are against the policy of the law, and are void. (Ohitty…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE PRYOR
delivered the opinion of the court.
The appellee, George W. Hunt, on the ist of January in the year 1877, borrowed of his grandfather, Thomas Johnson, the sum of five thousand dollars, for which he executed his note, payable in three years, with eight per cent, interest from the time of its execution.
The grandfather died, and his personal representatives instituted an action at law upon the note, to which the appellee pleaded, in substance, that decedent being a widower, and desirous of again marrying, had offered a relative the sum of ten thousand dollars to aid him in procuring…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Gunn v. FrybergerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
- Houston Bros. v. WagnerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Morrison v. RogersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Jangraw v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1903
- Rainbow International Marriage Service v. Ping CuiMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2002
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.