Pearson v. Zable
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 35—EQUITY APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. 1. The appellant’s property cannot be taken away from her under a lien-. created against it for.the benefit of a street contractor, unless she derives some benefit from the improvement.
Read the full summary
Case 35—EQUITY APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. 1. The appellant’s property cannot be taken away from her under a lien-. created against it for.the benefit of a street contractor, unless she derives some benefit from the improvement. She has actually been injured by it. 2. Her counter-claim against appellees cannot be avoided upon the ground that they did the work under the order's of the city. 3. The court erred in sustaining the demurrer to appellants’ cross-petition against the city of Louisville. (Prather v. City of Lexington, 8 Mon., 560; Patch v. City of Covington, 17 B. Mon.,…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE COFER
delivered the opinion of the court.
The female appellant owns a lot situated on Elizabeth, street, between Gallagher and O'Hara streets, in the city of Louisville.
The appellees, John and Fred. Zable, under a contract with the city, graded Elizabeth street from Gallagher to. O’Hara, and brought this suit against the appellants on an apportionment warrant for the recovery of that part of the-cost of grading the street which was apportioned against the-lot.
The appellants answer, alleging (i) that the grading of the street was not only of no benefit to the lot, but injured it (2) that a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kemper v. City of LouisvilleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1878
3Cited by12 opinions
- Lent v. TillsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Eminence Distillery Co. v. Henry County Board of SupervisorsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1918
- Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. WattSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1899
- City of St. Louis v. RankenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
- City of Louisville v. BitzerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1903
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.