Nesler's Admr. v. Smith

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Nesler's Admr. v. Smith

4 Ky. Op. 282, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 331

DecidedMarch 2, 1870

StatusPublished

This text of 4 Ky. Op. 282 (Nesler's Admr. v. Smith) 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

Nesler's Admr. v. Smith, 4 Ky. Op. 282, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 331 (Ky. Ct. App. 1870).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Peters:

This was an action in ordinary for a breach of covenant in a written contract for the exchange of lots, or parcels of ground near the city of Henderson.

At the date of the contract, appellee was a married woman, and might have then avoided the contract; but when the action was tried she was discovert, the title to the five acres of land which 'she contracted to convey to appellant’s intestate was. in. her, and she and her husband seem to have joined in a conveyance to said intestate before she commenced her action. And if that conveyance was ineffectual to pass her title, her prosecution of this action after her disability of coverture was removed, is a confirmation of the contract for the exchange of lots, and she can not avoid it now.

Perceiving, therefore, no available error in the proceedings and judgment appealed from, the said judgment is affirmed.

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

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Peters:

This was an action in ordinary for a breach of covenant in a written contract for the exchange of lots, or parcels of ground near the city of Henderson.

At the date of the contract, appellee was a married woman, and might have then avoided the contract; but when the action was tried she was discovert, the title to the five acres of land which 'she contracted to convey to appellant’s intestate was. in. her, and she and her husband seem to have joined in a conveyance to said intestate before she commenced her action. And if that conveyance was ineffectual to pass her title, her prosecution of this action after her disability of coverture was removed, is a confirmation of the contract for the exchange of lots, and she can not avoid it now.

Perceiving, therefore, no available error in the proceedings and judgment appealed from, the said judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 Ky. Op. 282, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neslers-admr-v-smith-kyctapp-1870.