Rowland v. Craig

2 Ky. 330, 1 Sneed 330, 1804 Ky. LEXIS 25
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedMay 29, 1804
StatusPublished
Cited by39 cases

This text of 2 Ky. 330 (Rowland v. Craig) 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
Rowland v. Craig, 2 Ky. 330, 1 Sneed 330, 1804 Ky. LEXIS 25 (Ky. Ct. App. 1804).

Opinion

The first error assigned ought not now to be regarded, as the principle therein complained of was settled by the opinion given in this cause by this court, at the August term, 1801, wherein it was determined that the report of the commissioners ought to be sustained, and to examine into this error would be indirectly opening the former decree given by this court. But should this oven be now permitted, the principle then settled has been since fully examined and approved in the case of Whitledge against Wait's Heir.

The second error assigned is well founded, and so much of the decree of the general court as directs that the complainants shall execute a bond to the defendants, conditioned to refund the amount decreed to the complainants for rents, profits, and waste, in case the land should be decreed from them by any other prior or better • [331]*331claim, is erroneous, and must be reversed. This not being dictated by any principle of law. or equity, 'nor provided for by the act concerning occupying claimants of land, this provision is made in that act only where the proprietor of the better title transfers and conveys such better title to the occupying claimant. But the provisions, of that act can not apply to this cause, as it was commenced previous to its passage.

Therefore, it is considered by the court, that so much of the decree aforesaid as directs the complainants to execute a bond to the defendants aforesaid be reversed, annulled, and set aside, and that the appellants recover of the appellees their costs in .this behalf expended, which is ordered to be certified to the general court.

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

Related

Terry Hall v. Bpm Lumber, LLC
Kentucky Supreme Court, 2024
Dickenson v. Third National Bank (In re Yates)
58 B.R. 257 (E.D. Tennessee, 1986)
Mellman v. Seelbach, Inc.
181 S.W.2d 424 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1944)
Moran v. Adkerson
79 S.W.2d 44 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1935)
Peters v. Goetz
136 Tenn. 257 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1916)
Dillingham v. Traders' Insurance Co.
120 Tenn. 302 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1907)
Cates v. Baxter
37 S.W. 219 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1896)
Meier v. Hess
32 P. 755 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1893)
Jackson v. Hamm
14 Colo. 58 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1890)
Exchange Nat. Bank v. Johnson
30 F. 588 (U.S. Circuit Court, 1887)
Smith v. Hubbard
85 Tenn. 306 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1887)
Robertson v. Baker
78 Tenn. 300 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1882)
Penniman & Bro. v. Smith
73 Tenn. 130 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1880)
Cornick v. Richards
71 Tenn. 2 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1879)
Gosling v. Griffin
85 Tenn. 737 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1875)
R. Moore & Co. v. Gennett & Co.
2 Tenn. Ch. R. 375 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1875)
Cornelius v. City Bank
3 Tenn. Ch. R. 5 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1875)
State Insurance v. Gennett
2 Tenn. Ch. R. 100 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1874)
Daniels v. Pratt
2 Tenn. Ch. R. 116 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1874)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 Ky. 330, 1 Sneed 330, 1804 Ky. LEXIS 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowland-v-craig-kyctapp-1804.