Hopkins v. Layne
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion op the Court by
Drury, Commissioner—
Affirming.
Out of the disputed location of the boundary line between the lands of these parties grew this litigation, and appellant, J. C. Hopkins, is here because he feels that the trial court erred in locating the line as claimed by the appellees. James Hatcher is named as a party appellant, but the summons issued for him by the trial court on Hopkins’ plea that he be made a party to this suit was never executed, so far asi the record shows. Hatcher did not enter his appearance, and was not before the trial court, except to testify as a witness. He…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Sackett v. JeffriesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919
- Dodd v. Pittsburg, C., C., & St. L. Ry.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1908
- Shrout v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
- Mutual Life Insurance v. MilesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1917
3Cited by5 opinions
- Lewallen v. MaysCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1936
- Brock v. MuseCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
- Jones v. WheeldonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1949
- Johnson v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1926
- Moore v. BatesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1960