Roberts v. Duerson

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Roberts v. Duerson

1 Ky. Op. 634, 1867 Ky. LEXIS 375

DecidedFebruary 26, 1867

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Ky. Op. 634 (Roberts v. Duerson) 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

Roberts v. Duerson, 1 Ky. Op. 634, 1867 Ky. LEXIS 375 (Ky. Ct. App. 1867).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Williams:

There is no evidence in the case that Mrs. Duerson was a married woman when she sued out the distress warrant.

O. Roberts was the owner of the property bonded by Mrs. Roberts and her surety, except the piano, when he subleased the premises for the remainder of the term, and when he removed it onto the premises; consequently, a lien then attached to it. The subsequent conveyance of the property to the use of his wife was not for a valuable consideration but voluntarily, and could not exonerate it from liability for the rent; therefore her surety in the claimant’s bond being under no disability became responsible, however ineffectual may have been the bond as to Mrs. Roberts, she being a married woman when she signed it. The judgment against the surety in the bond was proper and it is, therefore, affirmed, with damages.

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

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Williams:

There is no evidence in the case that Mrs. Duerson was a married woman when she sued out the distress warrant.

O. Roberts was the owner of the property bonded by Mrs. Roberts and her surety, except the piano, when he subleased the premises for the remainder of the term, and when he removed it onto the premises; consequently, a lien then attached to it. The subsequent conveyance of the property to the use of his wife was not for a valuable consideration but voluntarily, and could not exonerate it from liability for the rent; therefore her surety in the claimant’s bond being under no disability became responsible, however ineffectual may have been the bond as to Mrs. Roberts, she being a married woman when she signed it. The judgment against the surety in the bond was proper and it is, therefore, affirmed, with damages.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Ky. Op. 634, 1867 Ky. LEXIS 375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberts-v-duerson-kyctapp-1867.