Mudd v. Carico
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 93—EQUITY— APPEAL PROM DAVIESS CIRCUIT COURT. . 1. Personal judgment against Mudd was unauthorized by the pleadings.
Read the full summary
Case 93—EQUITY— APPEAL PROM DAVIESS CIRCUIT COURT. . 1. Personal judgment against Mudd was unauthorized by the pleadings. There is no allegation in the petition of any agreement between Mudd and Carico. 2. There is no allegation that Mu'dd’s undertaking to Carico was in. writing. 3. There is no denial of defendant’s allegation of waiver. 4. The written agreement could be waived by parol; and such waivers are favored in equity. 2 Jones on Evidence, secs. 447-453; Chiles v. Jones, 3 B. M., 51; Trumbo v. Curtright, 1 ; Mar., 582; Stark v. Wilson, 3 Bibb, 476; Keating v. Price, 1 Johnson’s Cases,…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE WHITE
delivered the opixtox oe the court.
Tbe petition herein alleges that in 1893 the appellee Wilfred Carioo, as executor of B. F. Dougherty, sold to Jerome Hayden a certain lot in the city of Owensboro, the eonsidei’ation being.$5,000, of which sum $1,000 was paid cash, and notes of $800 each were executed for the balance; that in November, 1895, Hayden and wife sold, and by deed conveyed, to appellant. Mudd, a one-half undivided interest in the property, the consideration for the purchase, among other things, being “that the said Mudd assume and pay to tin* plaintiff one-half of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Jennings v. CriderCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1867
- Hodgkins v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1870
3Cited by4 opinions
- Bryant v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919
- Chambers v. MurphyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1921
- Kushner v. KnopfCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
- Bennett v. GerkMissouri Court of Appeals · 1933