Bow v. State Highway Commission

55 S.W.2d 341, 246 Ky. 564, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 781
Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)·Decided December 16, 1932·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Opinion op the Court by

Drury, Commissioner

Affirming.

. Property belonging to Ellen Bow and eight others was taken for the construction of a highway, and Ellen Bow alone had appealed.

The statement of appeal filed reads, “Ellen Bow et al., Appellants,” but such expressions as “et al.,” “etc.,” “and others,” and “&c.,” are absolutely meaningless in a statement filed under section 739 of the Code of Civil Practice.

No exceptions had been filed to the _ report of the commissioners; therefore there was no issue made in the trial court and nothing to complain of here.

This concludes no one but Ellen Bow, as she is the only appellant.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bow v. State Highway Commission, 55 S.W.2d 341, 246 Ky. 564, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 781 (Ky. 1932).

55 S.W.2d 341 (Bow v. State Highway Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Adams v. Wells
72 S.W.2d 476 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1934)
Gray v. Greer
70 S.W.2d 683 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1934)