Sparks v. Ball
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 92 — PETITION EQUITY — APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE LAW AND EQUITY COURT. The life tenant is not entitled to compensation for improvements put upon the land with the knowledge that he had only a life estate.
Read the full summary
Case 92 — PETITION EQUITY — APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE LAW AND EQUITY COURT. The life tenant is not entitled to compensation for improvements put upon the land with the knowledge that he had only a life estate. (Bell v. Barnett, 2 J. J. M., 516; Taylor v. Whiting, 9 Dana, 401; Barlow v. Bell, 1 A. K. M., 246; Scroggs v, Taylor, 1 A. K. M., 247; Harrison v. Fleming, 7 Mon., 538.) The history of the growth of the law on the subject of allowing compensation for improvements made by an occupant upon land which is subsequently recovered by another party under a better title shows that the reason and…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Holt
In the assignment of dower to Susan Sparks as tlie widow of Nimrod Sparks,' there was allotted to her land worth eight hundred dollars more than her one-third portion. The decree, therefore, provided that for the use of so much of this excess as would otherwise have at once passed to their son, N. W. Sparks, she should pay to him a certain sum annually. Having failed to pay this annuity for several years, and having in the meantime marrried H. L. Ball, she, together *503with her husband, executed to N. W. Sparks on January 1, 1865. a note for three hundred and forty-seven dollars and sixteen…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Lindenberger v. CornellCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1921
- Straeffer v. RodmanCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911
- Wheeler v. KazeeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1952
- Weber v. LaumanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1900
- Wagner v. RuhlCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1919