Legal Opinion

Pribble v. Hall

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided March 10, 1877PublishedCited by 18 opinions

Case 11 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PROM PENDLETON CHANCERY COURT. 1. The appellant is not bound by the deed to the Hunts, because it was not acknowledged by her as required by law. 2. A husband can not sell and convey all the real estate he has, and deprive his wife and children of the possession against her consent. The object of the homestead exemption is for the benefit of the family —the wife and children.

Read the full summary

Case 11 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PROM PENDLETON CHANCERY COURT. 1. The appellant is not bound by the deed to the Hunts, because it was not acknowledged by her as required by law. 2. A husband can not sell and convey all the real estate he has, and deprive his wife and children of the possession against her consent. The object of the homestead exemption is for the benefit of the family —the wife and children. A deed conveying the homestead, executed by the husband alone, is as invalid, as to the homestead, as a mortgage executed by him without his wife joining with him therein. A mortgage and…

1Opinion of the Court

JUDGE COFER

delivered the opinion of the court.

The appellant brought this suit in equity against her husband James V. Pribble, the appellee Samuel W. Hall, and M. A. and Fanny Hunt. She alleged that she intermarried with her present husband in 1853, and that they had ever *63since continued to live together as husband and wife; that some years ago the father of her husband died, leaving a tract of land which descended to his heirs; that she was possessed of a small sum of money, derived in part from the estate of her father, and the residue from her personal earnings, and with said money…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Brame v. CraigCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1876
  2. Ford v. TealCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1870

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Reese Lumber Co. v. Licking Coal & Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
  2. Dukes v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1907
  3. Maloy Et Ux. v. Wm. Cameron Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
  4. Byers v. First State BankCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
  5. Ramey v. Francis, Day & Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API