Thomas v. Arthur
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 42 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL PROM LEWIS CIRCUIT COURT CITED ' Rev. Stat., sec. 29, chap. 106. 1 Marsh. 4, Shannon v. Kinney. _ . 13 B. Mon. 373, Jones v. Letcher. Litt. Sel. Cases, 501, Holtv.
Read the full summary
Case 42 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL PROM LEWIS CIRCUIT COURT CITED ' Rev. Stat., sec. 29, chap. 106. 1 Marsh. 4, Shannon v. Kinney. _ . 13 B. Mon. 373, Jones v. Letcher. Litt. Sel. Cases, 501, Holtv. Grume. 12 B. Mon. 461, Marshall v. Marshall’s administrators. 4 B. Mon. 472, Montgomery’s adm’rs v. Miller. 15 B. Mon. 183, Thomas’s ex’r v. Thomas. cited Redfield on Wills, page 5. Revised Statutes, sections 37, 38, 39, 84, 36, chapter 106. Revised Statutes (Hospitality Act), 3 Stanton, 410. 4 B. Mon. 473, Montgomery’s adm’r v. Miller.
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Robertson
Without any proved express contract for compensation, David Arthur, an old man, lived in the family of his daughter and her husband, the appellants, and may have been, as charged, clothed and nursed by them for about thirteen years. This action was brought to recover pay.
The following affidavit is appended to the petition, “that they hold a claim against the estate of David Arthur, sr., deceased, evidenced by a written contract, dated December 24, 1865, signed by said David Arthur, now deceased, for the sum of one thousand dollars, payable to said Margaret,” his said daughter. And that paper,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Kellum v. Browning's AdministratorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
- Stacy's Adm'r v. StacyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1944
- Schuster v. White's AdministratorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1899