Legal Opinion

Overton v. Means

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided February 1, 1881PublishedCited by 3 opinions

APPEAL FROM FAYETTE CIRCUIT COURT. [Cited, McAllister v. Ohio &c. Trust Co., 114 Ky. 540, 24 Ky. L. 1307, 71 S. W. 509; Davis v. Willson, 115 Ky. 639, 25 Ky. L. 21, 74 S. W. 696.]

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Cofer:

We do not deem it important or even proper, in the absence of other parties interested in the question, to determine whether the appellant has a vested or contingent interest in the land devised by his father. Whether it be the one or the other, it is vendible and subject to sale for the satisfaction of his debts. Gen. Stat. (1879) Ch. 38, Art. 12, § 1.

The appellant was called upon to make discovery, and if he deemed it to his interest that the extent of his right under his father’s will should be ascertained by the judgment of the court, he should have stated the facts…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Davis v. WillsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1903
  2. McAllister v. Ohio Valley Banking & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1903

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Davis v. WillsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1903
  2. McAllister v. Ohio Valley Banking & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1903
  3. Hurst v. RussellCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1934

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API