Whipple v. Earick
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 22 — PBTITIOU EQUITY APPEAL PROM LOUISVILLE LAW AND EQUITY COURT. 1. It was error to render a personal judgment against Jennie Whipple, shown by the record to be a married woman, and especially to direct that the execution be levied on her general estate.
Read the full summary
Case 22 — PBTITIOU EQUITY APPEAL PROM LOUISVILLE LAW AND EQUITY COURT. 1. It was error to render a personal judgment against Jennie Whipple, shown by the record to be a married woman, and especially to direct that the execution be levied on her general estate. (Sweeney v. Smith, 15 B. M., 827; Agnew v. Williams, 1 Bush, 7.) 2. It was error to charge appellants with any part of the one hundred and. fifty-five dollars fee allowed the attorney for the unknown heirs of Low and taxed as part of appellees’ costs in the court below, the appellants being in no way responsible therefor. 3. In order…
1Opinion of the Court
OHIEE JUSTICE HOLT
delivered the opinion oe the court.
This is a petition in the nature of a bill quia timet. It is urged that the petition is defective because it does, not aver the nature of the adverse claim and point out its defect. This is not required; it would often be impossible to do so. If it be true that the statements of the petition do not amount to an averment that the appellants are claiming adversely, yet their answer, which sets forth the nature of the wife’s claim, does so. This cured the defect if it existed. To maintain this action the-plaintiff must have both the legal…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Frazier v. MorrisCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
- Middlesboro Waterworks v. NealCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1899
- Murphy's Ex'r v. MurphyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1912
- Cumberland Co. v. KellyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913
- Taylor v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1918
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.