Birch v. Miller's Admr.
This text of 2 Ky. Op. 498 (Birch v. Miller's Admr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinion of the Court by
It is too late to inquire in tbis suit, into tbe validity or regularity of tbe judgment against Bircb and wife; and ber exoneration in tbis case, in consequence of ber coverture, cannot operate to bis prejudice.
Properly filing in tbe Marion circuit court the petition for injunction and rescission, certainly gave to tbat court jurisdiction over tbe cross petition for a specific execution and an enforcement of tbe lien. And we see no valid objection to tbe decree to tbat effect. Tbe land seems to have been sold by tbe tract, and dower is not in tbe way.
As tbe purchaser under tbat decree of sale will get all tbe title of both vendor and vendee, it cannot be material whether Miller’s deed was sufficient or not. But it appears to have passed'Miller’s title.
Wherefore, there being no substantial or available error in tbe judgment, it is affirmed.
Judge Hardin did not sit in tbis case.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 Ky. Op. 498, 1868 Ky. LEXIS 465, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/birch-v-millers-admr-kyctapp-1868.