Marrs v. Marrs

Decision Date03 October 1889
Citation12 S.W. 141
PartiesMARRS v. MARRS.
CourtKentucky Court of Appeals

Appeal from circuit court, Pike county.

"Not to be officially reported."

J. M York and R. T. Burns, for appellant.

A. J Auxier, W. M. Connolly, and R. M. Ferrell, for appellee.

PRYOR J.

This controversy is between the father and son. The appellant Thomas Marrs, sold and conveyed to his son, L. D. Marrs, a tract of land in the county of Pike, for $3,000, the deed reciting the consideration and the amount of the purchase money. The price was $3,000, for which the appellee executed his notes, payable at stipulated periods, and bearing interest, all but the first, from the 24th of February, 1880. The first note was for $500, and due the 1st of March, 1880. The appellant was advanced in years, and, being desirous of living with the appellee, induced the latter to purchase his land. After the sale had been consummated, the lived with his son for several years, when some trouble originated between the appellant and his son's wife, resulting in the old man's leaving the home of his son, and living with his other children. After leaving, the appellant wanted his purchase money, or a part of it, and, the appellee refusing to pay, this action was instituted to enforce his lien. The appellee, in defense of the action, alleged a mistake in the execution of the contract, and a failure to embody its terms in the deed or the notes that had been executed by the parties. He alleges that he was only to pay the interest on the purchase money during the life of his father, and that the latter agreed to execute a will by which he was to devise to the appellee $1,000 of the principal sum, and the balance to be paid to the remaining son and daughters of the appellant, with the privilege on the part of the appellee to pay at any time to the other children their part of the money in the proportion that he had agreed to devise it. The appellee also alleges payments to these children under this arrangement, and that, having paid the interest, the father, under the contract, had no right to recover any part of the principal. He also sets up a claim for board against his father, and claims, in an account rendered, pay for services rendered him from time to time during the period his father lived with him. The answer denies the alleged mistake, and also most all of the items set forth in this account; claims that no agreement existed for the payment of board, and, if so, that his labor for the son was equal to the value of his board. He denies the authority from him to the appellee to pay his other children any money, or that such was the contract when the land was sold.

Much testimony has been taken in the case, and proof conducing to show that a will was made by the appellant some 12 months or longer after the sale and conveyance, containing the devises to the children as the appellee alleges, and that he stated it was in accordance with the agreement between the two when...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Mudd v. Green
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • October 3, 1889

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT