Murphy v. Fryer

10 Ky. Op. 814, 1 Ky. L. Rptr. 348, 1880 Ky. LEXIS 410
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedOctober 27, 1880
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 10 Ky. Op. 814 (Murphy v. Fryer) 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
Murphy v. Fryer, 10 Ky. Op. 814, 1 Ky. L. Rptr. 348, 1880 Ky. LEXIS 410 (Ky. Ct. App. 1880).

Opinion

Opinion by

Judge Cofer:

The order of revivor was not served on Mrs. Murphy, and as the title to the land sought to be sold seems to belong to her, all subsequent steps in the case are void.

At the time of Mrs. Fryer’s death a sale had probably been made, but had not been reported or confirmed, and the suit should have been revived in the name of both the personal representative and heirs. The personal representative was a necessary party, because until the sale was confirmed there was a debt due to him; and the heirs were necessary parties before the sale could be confirmed because they were concerned in the question whether the report should be confirmed. The wrong tract of land seems to have been sold, and Mrs. Murphy being now before the court on this appeal, upon the return of the cause the personal representative should be permitted to come in and error in the judgment should be corrected.

The order confirming the sale and all subsequent orders and judgments are reversed, and cause remanded for further proper proceedings.

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

Related

De Yampert v. Manley
191 S.W. 905 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 Ky. Op. 814, 1 Ky. L. Rptr. 348, 1880 Ky. LEXIS 410, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-v-fryer-kyctapp-1880.