Ritchey's Admr. v. Sanders

2 Ky. Op. 66, 1867 Ky. LEXIS 392
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedNovember 27, 1867
StatusPublished

This text of 2 Ky. Op. 66 (Ritchey's Admr. v. Sanders) 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
Ritchey's Admr. v. Sanders, 2 Ky. Op. 66, 1867 Ky. LEXIS 392 (Ky. Ct. App. 1867).

Opinion

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Williams : ■

Notwithstanding all the children and heirs of Nath’l Sanders, deceased, was estopped from setting np the will of 1824, on account of their written agreement not to do so, yet when G. W. Sanders did procure it, to be set up and recorded, and got possession of the two slaves, which he sold to Jno. A. Ritchey, after his mother’s death in 1841, he claimed and held them as bequeathed to him under the will, and though he had taken out titles of administration, with the will annexed, his holding was adverse to the legitimate administrator and the other heirs.

But if this be not so, Ritchey having purchased one of the slaves in 1846, and the other in 1848, his holding from the time of his respective purchases was open and notoriously in his own right, therefore adverse, and the statute commenced and continued to run until he was made a party, and he having held for five years, his title became established.

Nor is he a pendente lite purchaser, for at the respective dates of his purchases there was no pending litigation, involving the rights of G. W. Sanders to said slaves.

The judgment against Ritchey’s administrator and heirs was therefore wholly erroneous, and it is reversed, with directions to dismiss the proceedings against them absolutely.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 Ky. Op. 66, 1867 Ky. LEXIS 392, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ritcheys-admr-v-sanders-kyctapp-1867.