Gathwright v. Hazard
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 13. APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. Motion. Argued — 1. That any hardship to Hazard and' wife, from the reversal of the decision of the chancellor, ought not to control, where there has been no fraud, which in this case is not pretended. It is safer to maintain the consistency of the law, than to make it so flexible and uncertain as to meet every case of' seeming hardship.
Read the full summary
Case 13. APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. Motion. Argued — 1. That any hardship to Hazard and' wife, from the reversal of the decision of the chancellor, ought not to control, where there has been no fraud, which in this case is not pretended. It is safer to maintain the consistency of the law, than to make it so flexible and uncertain as to meet every case of' seeming hardship. But the supposed sacrifice in this, case is not so great as represented; according to a, fair and practical test, the property, which sold for $8 >0, in the opinion of witnesses, was not worth more than $2,000.…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Stites
delivered the opinioD of the court:
This proceeding was had in the Louisville chancery court, in behalf of the appellees, to vacate and set aside a sale and conveyance of a house and lot made under a judgment of that court, and in virtue of which, the appellant claims title to the property.
Upon hearing, the chancellor held — that the sale and conveyance should be set aside upon the appellees paying to appellant his purchase money and interest, together with what expenses he had incurred, *560and a bonus of fifty dollars for his trouble, and from that judgment he has appealed.
It appears…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Blakey v. AbertCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1833