Barlow v. Bell

• Decision Date: 12 June 1818
• Citation: 8 Ky. 246
• Parties: Ambrose Barlow v. Sarah Bell.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

8 Ky. 246

Ambrose Barlow v. Sarah Bell.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

June 12, 1818

ON AN APPEAL FROM A DECREE OF THE BARREN CIRCUIT COURT.

Wickliffe for appellant.

Hughes for appellee.

OPINION

OWSLEY JUDGE:

Some time early in 1801, the appellant purchased from a certain John Bell, who acted as the agent of his father, William Bell, a tract of land in Barren county, and having obtained from the agent a deed of conveyance, he settled upon the land, and made lasting and valuable improvements.

Whilst the appellant was thus possessed of the land, but after the appellee's husband, William Bell, had departed this life she, asserting title in her own right, brought suit, and finally succeeded in recovering the land.

To obtain compensation for his improvements, the appellant then brought this suit in equity, but the court being of opinion his claim could not be sustained, dismissed his bill with costs; and from that decree the appellant has appealed to this court.

As the labor bestowed in improving the land, is sunk in the land, and was not done at the appellee's request, it is plain, that she can not, upon any common law proceeding, be subjected to the appellant's claim for compensation.

A possessor of land without title either in law or equity, but believing it bona fide to be his own, is by the general principles of equity entitled to compensation for his ameliorations.

Nor have we been able to find any adjudged case, where the English courts of equity have, under such circumstances, decided upon the right to compensation; but regarding courts of equity in supplying the defects of the common law, as being governed by the principles of natural justice, in the absence of all precedent, we should have no hesitation in relieving the possesor for improvements made upon the land, whilst he bona fide considered it his own. The possessor, by bestowing his money and labor in meliorating the land, advances its value, and, consequently, the rightful owner, unless liable to the claim of compensation, is so much gainer by the loss of the possessor; contrary to the maxim nemo debit locupletari aliena jactura.

But to bring himself within the influence of this principle, it is not enough, that the possessor shews himself to have meliorated the land, but his money and labor must be bestowed under an honest conviction of his being the rightful owner of the land. For, if he takes possession without...