Camenisch v. City of Stanford
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BUCKINGHAM, Judge.
The appellants herein, hereinafter referred to as “the Camenisches,” appeal from a summary judgment rendered by the Lincoln Circuit Court in favor of the appellee, the City of Stanford. We vacate and remand for further proceedings.
Over 100 years ago, the property involved herein was a farm owned by E.T. and Emma Rochester. On May 10, 1892, the Rochesters conveyed by deed a portion of the farm to Howe Pump and Engine Company. The deed stated that part of its consideration was as follows:
In further consideration of the conveyance and as part of the' contract of sale and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Carroll v. MeredithCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 2001
- Oliver v. SchultzKentucky Supreme Court · 1994
- Gray v. Jackson Purchase Production Credit Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1985
- Loid v. KellCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1992
- Fay E. Sams Money Purchase Pension Plan v. JansenCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1999
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Montfort v. Trek Resources, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland)2006
- Your Community Bank, Inc. v. Woodlawn Springs Homeowners Ass'nKentucky Supreme Court · 2014
- Melton v. MeltonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 2007
- Kenneth Lee Montfort v. Trek Resources, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland)2006
- St. Joseph Catholic Orphan Society v. Hon Brian C. Edwards Judge, Jefferson Circuit Court, Division Eleven (11)Kentucky Supreme Court · 2015
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.