Legal Opinion

Hall v. Ferguson

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided March 23, 1956PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

The controversy is over the location of a boundary line between the property of the parties. The action is for trespass upon a relatively small parcel of land claimed by both parties.

The appeal is upon notice as one “permitted by law as a matter of right”. KRS 21.060; CR 73.02. However, the judgment does not “fix the value of” the property in controversy as is required by KRS 21.070. Therefore, jurisdiction of this court is not shown and the appeal must be dismissed. Manning v. Mauldin, Ky., 280 S.W.2d 503; Bowling v. Bowling, Ky., 283 S.W.2d 837.

It appears from the briefs that the decision…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bowling v. BowlingCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1955
  2. Manning v. MauldinCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1955

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Coyle v. Capital Engineering Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1958
  2. Hargis v. DumbacherCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1956
  3. Rogers v. HollowayCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API