Craig v. Turley's Administrator
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 83 — PETITIONS EQUITY APPEALS FROM GALLATIN CIRCUIT COURT. The statute of frauds can not be invoked as a shield to enable one to perpetrate fraud. Where one has performed a valuable part of an agreement, he is entitled to a specific execution of the other, or to recover back what he has paid.
Read the full summary
Case 83 — PETITIONS EQUITY APPEALS FROM GALLATIN CIRCUIT COURT. The statute of frauds can not be invoked as a shield to enable one to perpetrate fraud. Where one has performed a valuable part of an agreement, he is entitled to a specific execution of the other, or to recover back what he has paid. (Story’s Equity, vol. 2, sec. 759, 762-3 ; Roberts on Frauds, 138.) Where one purchases land in his own name and upon his own credit, a mere verbal agreement to make the purchase for another is not enforceable, because within the statute of frauds. (3 A. K. Marshall, 57, Fowlce v. Slaughter; 3 Met.,…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE LEWIS
delivered the opinion oe the court.
In September, 1876, in tbe action of Craig v. Howe and others, judgment was rendered for tbe sale of a tract of land now in controversy, and distribution of tbe proceeds of sale to pay, first, tbe costs of all parties to tbe action; second, a debt to Howe for about one hundred and eighty-seven dollars, and third, a debt of appellant, Craig, for five hundred and thirty dollars and interest from 1860.
At tbe sale made by tbe commissioner November 20, 1876, Samuel Turley, now dead, became tbe purchaser at the price of five hundred and seventy dollars,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Culver v. GrahamWyoming Supreme Court · 1889
- Hazard Dean Coal Co. v. McIntoshCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919
- Whitt v. Ky. Oil Producing Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1928
- Hoar v. HoarNew York Supreme Court · 1888