Kinslow v. Grove
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 46 — PETITION EQUITY — APPEAL PROM BARREN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. If it was intended that this action should be brought under the provisions of sub-section 2 of section 490 of the Civil Code, the answer of the guardian should have been as full and complete as a petition should be.
Read the full summary
Case 46 — PETITION EQUITY — APPEAL PROM BARREN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. If it was intended that this action should be brought under the provisions of sub-section 2 of section 490 of the Civil Code, the answer of the guardian should have been as full and complete as a petition should be. (Carpenter & Grigsby v. Strother’s heirs, 16 B. M„ 296.) 2. If it be contended that the action was a proceeding under the provisions of section 6, article 5, chapter 63, General Statutes, the answer is that the requirements of that statute have not been complied with. 3. While the chancellor has the power, by reason…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE LEWIS
delivered the opinion of the court.
Amanda J. Buford, widow of G.( Y. Buford, in 1890 sold and covenanted to convey a tract of land containing 226 acres, of which her husband had died owner, to Jesse Kins-low and others at the price of $1,180, and this is an action by W. H. Grove, assignee of one of the notes given for pur*268chase money, to recover judgment thereon and to subject the land to satisfy it.
The principal and only defense available, if any, is that she did not have nor can now make a good title to the land.
Mrs. Buford was appointed, in conjunction with another person,…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Vickers v. VickersCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920
- B'hymer's Guardian v. B'hymerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1934
- Hulsewede v. Churchman's Extx.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1901
- Cox v. BurrusCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1923
- Caulder v. ElmoreCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.