Bent v. Maupin
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 41 — MOTION APPEAL PROM MONTGOMERY CIRCUIT COURT. 1. An execution sale of land cannot he set aside on motion on the ground that the execution defendant had no title. (2 J. J. M., 292; Weiseger v. McClure.) 2. Motion to set aside sale under execution for fraud, covin or collusion must he made within one year from date of sale.
Read the full summary
Case 41 — MOTION APPEAL PROM MONTGOMERY CIRCUIT COURT. 1. An execution sale of land cannot he set aside on motion on the ground that the execution defendant had no title. (2 J. J. M., 292; Weiseger v. McClure.) 2. Motion to set aside sale under execution for fraud, covin or collusion must he made within one year from date of sale. (Gen. Stat., chap. 38, art. 15, sec. 1; Gen. Stat., chap. 38, art. 17, sec. 8; Rorer on Judicial Sales, secs. 602, 603, 694.) 1. When an execution has been returned without any satisfaction in fact, the execution plaintiff may have it quashed, that another execution…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE LEWIS
DELIVERED THE OPINION OE THE COURT,
Appellees, John Maupin. and the firm of Maupin & Orear, caused to be duly executed on the appellant Bent a notice in substance that, November 28, 1883, they would move the Montgomery Circuit Court to quash the levy and return on an execution issued from the office of the clerk of that court, directed to the sheriff of Carter county, in favor of Maupin & Orear, and also the venditioni exponas issued thereon, and return on the same, for the reason appellant, the defendant in the execution, had no interest whatever in the land sold under said writs,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Sanders v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1835
- Tucker v. FogleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1870
- De Wolf v. Mallett's AdministratorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1835
- Newman v. HazelriggCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1866
- Miller v. BoydCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1833