Ivory v. Kennedy
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Appeal from tlie Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Texas. Statement by PARDEE,'Circuit Judge: This bill was brought by Holmes Ivory, complainant, appellant here, and A. S. Caldwell, Bolton Smith, and J. M. Judah, nominal complainants, in the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Texas, at Galveston, against Walter Kennedy, for himself, and as surviving partner of the ' firm of Walker & Kennedy, and as independent executor…
Read the full summary
Appeal from tlie Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Texas. Statement by PARDEE,'Circuit Judge: This bill was brought by Holmes Ivory, complainant, appellant here, and A. S. Caldwell, Bolton Smith, and J. M. Judah, nominal complainants, in the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Texas, at Galveston, against Walter Kennedy, for himself, and as surviving partner of the ' firm of Walker & Kennedy, and as independent executor of the last will and testament of John F. Walker,'deceased, and against Sarah M. Kennedy, wife of Walter Kennedy, and…
1Opinion of the Court
PARDEE, Circuit Judge,
(after stating-the case,) delivered the opinion of the court.
The first error assigned is well taken. Complainant’s mortgage for the entire amount includes the 1,203 acres known as the “Waverly Place” (except the Kennedy homestead) as well as the balance of (he tract, and the complainant is clearly entitled to a decree of foreclosure and sale of the tract as a whole, the only exemptions therefrom allowable being the two tracts of 200 acres each claimed respectively by Walter Kennedy and Serena K. Walker as homesteads; the one because excepted in the deeds of trust, the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pridgen v. WarnTexas Supreme Court · 1891
- Searle v. ChapmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
3Cited by2 opinions
- Watkins v. LittleCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1897
- Western Mortg. & Inv. Co. v. GanzerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1894