McCredie v. Lloyd

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

McCredie v. Lloyd

259 S.W.2d 51, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 925

DecidedJune 12, 1953

StatusPublished

This text of 259 S.W.2d 51 (McCredie v. Lloyd) 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

McCredie v. Lloyd, 259 S.W.2d 51, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 925 (Ky. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

MILLIKEN, Justice.

This case involves an action by a father for $50,000 damages against his daughter and son-in-law for having him committed to the Central State Hospital allegedly without reasonable cause therefor. The appellees, defendants below, answered “that on the 27th day of October, 1950, and after the proceedings complained of in the petition, the plaintiff (appellant) executed an agreement whereby plaintiff released the defendants (appellees), and each of them, from any and all claims which he may have against the defendants.” The release, which was filed as an exhibit, settled the disposition of listed personal property between the litigants and concluded, “In consideration of the foregoing, and for other valuable consideration, first party hereby releases second parties from any and all claims which he may have against them,” and was executed in the presence of counsel of the respective parties and also signed by them.

When the appellant filed a reply denying all of the affirmative allegations of the ap-pellees’ answer, the appellees moved the court to dismiss the reply as a sham pleading, which the court did after appellant admitted the execution of the release. When the appellant refused to plead further, the trial judge dismissed his petition.

By its terms, the release is a complete defense to the action and, since its execution was admitted and no allegation of misrepresentation or fraud in its procurement or other affirmative matter pleaded, the trial judge ruled properly*.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

MILLIKEN, Justice.

This case involves an action by a father for $50,000 damages against his daughter and son-in-law for having him committed to the Central State Hospital allegedly without reasonable cause therefor. The appellees, defendants below, answered “that on the 27th day of October, 1950, and after the proceedings complained of in the petition, the plaintiff (appellant) executed an agreement whereby plaintiff released the defendants (appellees), and each of them, from any and all claims which he may have against the defendants.” The release, which was filed as an exhibit, settled the disposition of listed personal property between the litigants and concluded, “In consideration of the foregoing, and for other valuable consideration, first party hereby releases second parties from any and all claims which he may have against them,” and was executed in the presence of counsel of the respective parties and also signed by them.

When the appellant filed a reply denying all of the affirmative allegations of the ap-pellees’ answer, the appellees moved the court to dismiss the reply as a sham pleading, which the court did after appellant admitted the execution of the release. When the appellant refused to plead further, the trial judge dismissed his petition.

By its terms, the release is a complete defense to the action and, since its execution was admitted and no allegation of misrepresentation or fraud in its procurement or other affirmative matter pleaded, the trial judge ruled properly*.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 S.W.2d 51, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 925, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccredie-v-lloyd-kyctapp-1953.