Clore v. Lambert
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 44—PETITION EQUITY APPEAL FROM HENDERSON COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. 1. The machinery erected by Clore & Clay was erected after appellee’s conveyance to them. It changed a tobacco warehouse into a planing-mill.
Read the full summary
Case 44—PETITION EQUITY APPEAL FROM HENDERSON COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. 1. The machinery erected by Clore & Clay was erected after appellee’s conveyance to them. It changed a tobacco warehouse into a planing-mill. It was not mentioned in the deed, and was, after appellant’s purchase of it under execution, taken from the freehold without injury to it, and without impairing appellee’s lien for his purchase money. 2. It never was subject to appellee’s lien ; it was not agreed that it should be so, and no intention by either vendor or vendees was ever expressed to that effect. (4 Met., 358; 2d vol.…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE HINES
delivered the opinion of the court.
Appellee sold and conveyed to James F. Clay and J, 01 Clore a house and lot in the city of Henderson, reserving a. lien for the purchase money. At the time of the purchase Clay and Clore contemplated converting the building into a planing-mill, which facfc'was known to appellee, but no agreement was had that the property should be used for that purpose. Subsequently the vendees made some addition to the building and placed therein an engine • and machinery, suitable to the purpose contemplated at the time of the purchase, and attached it by bolts…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Choate v. KimballSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1892
- Helm v. GilroyOregon Supreme Court · 1891
- United States Cast Iron Pipe & Foundry Co. v. Henry Vogt Machine Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1918
- Morrow Manufacturing Co. v. Race Creek Coal Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1928
- Georgetown Water Co. v. Fidelity Trust & Safety Vault Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1904
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.