Barnett v. Higgins
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Chancery. From the Circuit Court for Christian County. Statement of thq case‘ Incumbrances pn the land. ‘ '■ ‘ Uiiless the vendor of land has1 a clear title when’ his bill for a specific execution comes to a' hearing, he can haveno decree—even though he' may have been lulled or thrown off his guard by the purchaser. Want of proof that the grantors in a deed arte fife heirs,- and the' only heirs, of one who died seized of the land, is a fatal defect.
Read the full summary
Chancery. From the Circuit Court for Christian County. Statement of thq case‘ Incumbrances pn the land. ‘ '■ ‘ Uiiless the vendor of land has1 a clear title when’ his bill for a specific execution comes to a' hearing, he can haveno decree—even though he' may have been lulled or thrown off his guard by the purchaser. Want of proof that the grantors in a deed arte fife heirs,- and the' only heirs, of one who died seized of the land, is a fatal defect. A recital in a deed, or pcAver, is not sufficient evidence of heir-ship, or of title-in' the grantor.- The requisitio'ftif of the act' giving!…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Ewing
delivered the Opinion of the Court.
John Barnett sold to Durrett Higgins a tract of three hundred acres ofland, for eighteen hundred dollars, payable by instalments, and on the 8th of December, 1830, executed his bond for a title, to be made “when the last payment was made, on or before the first day of March, 1834,” and put Higgins in possession. The last pay*566ment being made in April, 1834, and Barnett failing to make a title, Higgins brought suit at law, in June, and recovered a judgment against him, at the November term following, on his title bond, for two thousand and…
2Cited by4 opinions
- McDonald v. RankinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Dungan v. Von PuhlSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
- Milan v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1925
- Hite v. ReeveCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1873