Mueller v. Engeln
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 51 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. CITED 6 Greenleaf’s Rep. 158, Parrar v. Stackpole. 4Met. 361, Johnson v. Wiseman. 2 Watts & Serg. 118, Voorhies v. Freeman. 2 Smith’s Leading Oases, pp. 268, 269. 4 Met.
Read the full summary
Case 51 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. CITED 6 Greenleaf’s Rep. 158, Parrar v. Stackpole. 4Met. 361, Johnson v. Wiseman. 2 Watts & Serg. 118, Voorhies v. Freeman. 2 Smith’s Leading Oases, pp. 268, 269. 4 Met. (Mass.) 306, Winslow v. Insurance Oo. 5 Munford, 539, Williams v. Price. 9 Barb. 630, Dunning v. Stearns. 7 Oal. 264, Hewitt v. Flint. 4 Littell, 319, Johnston v. Gwathmey. 6 B. Mon. 73, Honoré v. Bakewell. 6 B. Mon. 74, Thornton v. Knox. 7 B. Mon. 117, Woodward v. Woodward. 4 Ohio Rep. 458, Reeder v. Barr. 23 Ohio St. 114, Metcalfe v. Fosdick. 28 New York, 180,…
1Opinion of the Court
CHIEF JUSTICE LIB US AY
delivered the opinion oe the court.
• Mueller, by his deed to Kniper and Nadorfíj conveyed the real estate, and evidenced the fact of a sale to them of the personal property therein described.
The recital of the amount of unpaid purchase-money secured and preserved a vendor’s lien as to the realty, and the recording of the conveyance was, under the statute, notice to the world, so far as that lien was concerned. But as to the personalty, the conveyance or deed was a mere bill of sale, which is neither authorized nor required to be put to record. As between the vendor and…
2Cited by6 opinions
- In Re Van WinkleDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1943
- United States v. Shelby Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Virginia Iron, Coal & Coke Co. v. CombsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919
- Billington v. DunnCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1926
- American State Bank v. KellerNebraska Supreme Court · 1924
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.