Darnell v. Smith's
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 41 — PETITION EQUITY — APPEAL PROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT. The rights of the creditor attach alone to the amount of money that may be paid on the price of the land or upon the improvements after the creation of his debt. Therefore, more than $1,000 having been paid by the debtor on the purchase of the land after the creation of appellant’s debts, the homestead fund should, to that extent, be applied to the payment, of their debts.
Read the full summary
Case 41 — PETITION EQUITY — APPEAL PROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT. The rights of the creditor attach alone to the amount of money that may be paid on the price of the land or upon the improvements after the creation of his debt. Therefore, more than $1,000 having been paid by the debtor on the purchase of the land after the creation of appellant’s debts, the homestead fund should, to that extent, be applied to the payment, of their debts. (Moseley v. Bevins, 12 Ky., L. R.. 826.) More than one thousand dollars having been expended by the debtor in the erection of improvements before the creation…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE GRACE
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a contest between a creditor of S. F. Smith, deceased, and his infant children and heirs at law as to whether the creditor can subject $1,000, the value of the homestead, to the payment of his debt.
The facts as agreed in the record are that Smithbought the lot of ground on January 11,1881, at the price of $2,100, paying in cash the sum of $100 only, and executing his notes for *239the deferred payment'of $2,000, and that during the year 1881 he placed improvements on said lot of the value of $1,-700, occupying same then and continuously since…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hemphill v. Haas, Lyons & Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1889
- Moseley v. BevinsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1891
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ratliff v. Anderson & RatliffCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1922