Wickliffe v. Wilson

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Wickliffe v. Wilson

41 Ky. 43, 2 B. Mon. 43, 1841 Ky. LEXIS 76

DecidedSeptember 23, 1841

StatusPublished

This text of 41 Ky. 43 (Wickliffe v. Wilson) 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

Wickliffe v. Wilson, 41 Ky. 43, 2 B. Mon. 43, 1841 Ky. LEXIS 76 (Ky. Ct. App. 1841).

Pincite

Opinion

Chief Justice Robehtson

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

As hitherto virtually decided in- the cases of Scott vs Moss, 2 Dana, 275, and Cardwell vs Sprigg’s heirs, 7 Ib. 42, the occasional cutting of wood for fuel, on an uninclosed. and unimproved tract of land, not connected by title or boundary with any actual improvement, residence, or other ostensible occupancy, is not alone sufficient to avoid, as champertous under the statute of 1824, a sale and conveyance thereof by an adversary claimant, to a stranger, during such use. There being, in this case, no other evidence of occupancy, adverse to Wilson, than that just described, we are of the* opinion that the Circuit Court erred in instructing the jury that they might find his deed to Wickliffe, in 1827, to have been champertous; and the jury, of course, had no right to find, as they did, that this deed was void in consequence of an adverse possession of the land at the date of it, especially as there is no evidence that Wickliffe knew that the land was even used adversely to' his vendor.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is, therefore, reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

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

Chief Justice Robehtson

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

As hitherto virtually decided in- the cases of Scott vs Moss, 2 Dana, 275, and Cardwell vs Sprigg’s heirs, 7 Ib. 42, the occasional cutting of wood for fuel, on an uninclosed. and unimproved tract of land, not connected by title or boundary with any actual improvement, residence, or other ostensible occupancy, is not alone sufficient to avoid, as champertous under the statute of 1824, a sale and conveyance thereof by an adversary claimant, to a stranger, during such use. There being, in this case, no other evidence of occupancy, adverse to Wilson, than that just described, we are of the* opinion that the Circuit Court erred in instructing the jury that they might find his deed to Wickliffe, in 1827, to have been champertous; and the jury, of course, had no right to find, as they did, that this deed was void in consequence of an adverse possession of the land at the date of it, especially as there is no evidence that Wickliffe knew that the land was even used adversely to' his vendor.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is, therefore, reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 Ky. 43, 2 B. Mon. 43, 1841 Ky. LEXIS 76, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wickliffe-v-wilson-kyctapp-1841.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack