Holeman v. Maupin

19 Ky. 380, 3 T.B. Mon. 380, 1826 Ky. LEXIS 78
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedOctober 23, 1826
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 19 Ky. 380 (Holeman v. Maupin) 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
Holeman v. Maupin, 19 Ky. 380, 3 T.B. Mon. 380, 1826 Ky. LEXIS 78 (Ky. Ct. App. 1826).

Opinion

Judge Owsley

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

After having accepted from the, Bavnscs a deed fpi»'the land, though it may never bav.e been proved aric* recorded, Maupin can have no equity to enjoin the collection of the money, which, by his contract with lloleman, for the purchase, he stipulated to pay, but to remedy any defects in his title, be should have recourse' to the Barnses. It was, therefore? erroneous to decree a perpetuation of the injunction which had been granted Maupin, against the judg-. ffioiit at law recovered by Holemap, for part of the [381]*381purchase money, and consequently, the decree must be reversed vvith cost, the cause remanded to the court below, and the bill of Maupin dismissed, with cost and damages.

Mayes and Caperton for plaintiff) Turner for defondant. . ,

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

Related

Stevens & Elkins v. Lewis
185 S.W. 873 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1916)
Runyon v. Culver
181 S.W. 640 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1916)
Home Ins. v. Wood
72 S.W. 15 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1903)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 Ky. 380, 3 T.B. Mon. 380, 1826 Ky. LEXIS 78, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holeman-v-maupin-kyctapp-1826.