Flynn v. Hart

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Flynn v. Hart

2 Ky. Op. 289, 1868 Ky. LEXIS 374

DecidedJune 12, 1868

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Ky. Op. 289 (Flynn v. Hart) 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.

Bluebook

Flynn v. Hart, 2 Ky. Op. 289, 1868 Ky. LEXIS 374 (Ky. Ct. App. 1868).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Williams :

James, Moore, for appellant. Vaulwinlde, Fox, for appellees.

The continued occupancy of the land by D. A. Davis after his purchase from Oalyer, together with the payments made by him to his vendor after the date of his assignment of Calyer’s title bond to his father-in-law, Flynn, connected with his insolvent condition and total absence of any evidence of payment of the consideration set up by Flynn to him, and the inconsistency of Flynn’s answer in saying that Davis still owed about $180 when the bond was assigned to him in 1864, the real date of the assignment being February 3, 1865, and all the payments being made in December, 1864, January, 1865, and January, 1866, but the $250 paid at the time of the purchase by Davis from Oalyer and these all being made by Davis, leaves but little room to doubt that the whole arrangement between Davis and Flynn was fictitious and for the fraudulent purpose of preventing a sale of the land by Davis’ creditors.

Wherefore, the judgment is affirmed.

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

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Williams :

James, Moore, for appellant. Vaulwinlde, Fox, for appellees.

The continued occupancy of the land by D. A. Davis after his purchase from Oalyer, together with the payments made by him to his vendor after the date of his assignment of Calyer’s title bond to his father-in-law, Flynn, connected with his insolvent condition and total absence of any evidence of payment of the consideration set up by Flynn to him, and the inconsistency of Flynn’s answer in saying that Davis still owed about $180 when the bond was assigned to him in 1864, the real date of the assignment being February 3, 1865, and all the payments being made in December, 1864, January, 1865, and January, 1866, but the $250 paid at the time of the purchase by Davis from Oalyer and these all being made by Davis, leaves but little room to doubt that the whole arrangement between Davis and Flynn was fictitious and for the fraudulent purpose of preventing a sale of the land by Davis’ creditors.

Wherefore, the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Ky. Op. 289, 1868 Ky. LEXIS 374, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flynn-v-hart-kyctapp-1868.