Drye v. Cook & Green's Trustee
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 6 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PROM LINCOLN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The demurrer to the answer should have been overruled or carried back and sustained as to the petition.
Read the full summary
Case 6 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PROM LINCOLN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The demurrer to the answer should have been overruled or carried back and sustained as to the petition. (Mitchell v. Mattingly, 1 Met. 239; Young v. Duhme, 4 Met. 242; Martin v. McDonald, 14 B. Mon. 437; Lytle v. Lytle, 2 Met. 128.) 2. The averments that the mortgage “ was executed, made, and delivered” and “duly acknowledged according to law, and that he qualified as trustee,” etc., etc., are mere legal conclusions. (Quisenberry v. Artis, 1 Duv. 30; Bently v. Bustard, 16 B. Mon. 686; Shelden v. Hoy, 11 How. 12; Beech v. King, 17…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE ELLIOTT
delivered the opinion op the court.
On the 26th day of February, 1877, Priscilla T. Drye and her husband ¥m. S. Drye executed their promissory note to Green, Hocker & Co., for $2,290.59, due twelve months after date, with interest at the rate of eight per cent per annum till paid, and payable at the National Bank of Stanford. On the same day Mrs. Drye and her husband executed a mortgage, by which they conveyed to Green, Hocker & Co. a tract of about twenty-three acres of land lying in Lincoln County, near Hustonville, to secure the note. Appellees say that shortly after the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hobson v. Hobson'sCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1871
- Sharp's adm'r v. Proctor's adm'rCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1869
- Smith v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1859