Clark v. Jones
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
APPEAL FROM MUIILENBURG CIRCUIT. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court. Rep. The petition in this case was filed by Clark to recover a tract of land in the possession of Jones. The facts present the case in a concise form, but a short statement here may make them more easily comprehended.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM MUIILENBURG CIRCUIT. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court. Rep. The petition in this case was filed by Clark to recover a tract of land in the possession of Jones. The facts present the case in a concise form, but a short statement here may make them more easily comprehended. Clark claims under the will of his brother, Gilbert Clark, who claimed, by sherilf’s deed, the interest of the heirs of Samuel H. Earle, one of the patentees, and a division between him and the heirs of James Hunter, the other patentee, and a commissioner’s deed direct to David Clark.…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Crenshaw
delivered the opinion of the Court.
A certificate upon an entry was granted, by the County Court of Muhlenburg county, to Peter Shull, in March, 1801, and a survey was made of the land upon this certificate in 1804; and the second installment of the state price being unpaid, the land was exposed to sale for this installment, and was purchased by Samuel H. Earle, who transferred one half thereof to James Hunter; and the state price being paid, a patent for the land was issued to Earle and Hunter in July, 1843, and this patent covers the land in controversy; and a title to the land…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Martin v. GoodmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1927
- Frazier v. FrazierCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1883