Newman v. Moore
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
CASE 21 — PETITION EQUITY — Where a married woman refuses to perform her contract for the sale of land, one to whom she has assigned the purchase money notes is entitled to a lien on the land therefor. As the allegations of the cross-petition are all denied in the reply, and appellant offered, no evidence whatever in the case, the judgment of the chancellor was proper.
Read the full summary
CASE 21 — PETITION EQUITY — Where a married woman refuses to perform her contract for the sale of land, one to whom she has assigned the purchase money notes is entitled to a lien on the land therefor. As the allegations of the cross-petition are all denied in the reply, and appellant offered, no evidence whatever in the case, the judgment of the chancellor was proper. The Moores were not made parties to appellant’s cross-action, and, therefore, he can not complain of the judgment below so far as it affects them.
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE HAZELRIGG
delivered the opinion op the court.
While a contract between a married woman and another may not be enforced specifically, yet, not even a married woman may so conduct herself as to defraud another aud escape responsibility, if, in the nature of things, reparation can be made.
*148She will not be allowed to take advantage of her own wrong, and will be estopped from interposing her inability to contract, in bar of the consequences of her own fraud.
In this case Mrs. Moore, in conjunction with her husband, sold and covenanted to convey her land to I. C. Lowe. She received two hundred…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Looney v. Elkhorn Land & Improvement Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1922
- Floyd v. MackeyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1902
- Venters v. PotterCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919
- Buford v. MochySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
- Gardner v. BreedloveCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1934
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.