Hubbard v. Wickliffe

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Hubbard v. Wickliffe

11 Ky. 80, 1 Litt. 80, 1822 Ky. LEXIS 32

DecidedApril 12, 1822

StatusPublished

This text of 11 Ky. 80 (Hubbard v. Wickliffe) 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

Hubbard v. Wickliffe, 11 Ky. 80, 1 Litt. 80, 1822 Ky. LEXIS 32 (Ky. Ct. App. 1822).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion of the Court.

THIS writ of error is prosecuted to reverse an order of the county court of Nelson, establishing a road. The assignments of error are various, and among other things they question the sufficiency of the order appointing the viewers of the road. The viewers, on the application of Martin H. Wickliffe. were, by the order appointing them, directed to “ view and report, truly and, impartially, to court, the conveniences and inconveniences which will result, as well to individuals as to the public, by opening a road from the Elizabethtown road to Runnersport warehouse, in such manner as said Wickliffe may direct.”

This order is not only in substance, but in language, precisely the same as that which was held by this court to be invalid, in the case of Hubbard vs. Wickliffe, 2 Marsh. 502; and on the authority of that case, the order appointing the viewers, and all subsequent proceedings thereunder, must be reversed with costs.

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

Opinion of the Court.

THIS writ of error is prosecuted to reverse an order of the county court of Nelson, establishing a road. The assignments of error are various, and among other things they question the sufficiency of the order appointing the viewers of the road. The viewers, on the application of Martin H. Wickliffe. were, by the order appointing them, directed to “ view and report, truly and, impartially, to court, the conveniences and inconveniences which will result, as well to individuals as to the public, by opening a road from the Elizabethtown road to Runnersport warehouse, in such manner as said Wickliffe may direct.”

This order is not only in substance, but in language, precisely the same as that which was held by this court to be invalid, in the case of Hubbard vs. Wickliffe, 2 Marsh. 502; and on the authority of that case, the order appointing the viewers, and all subsequent proceedings thereunder, must be reversed with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 Ky. 80, 1 Litt. 80, 1822 Ky. LEXIS 32, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hubbard-v-wickliffe-kyctapp-1822.