Ferguson v. Akers
Decision Date | 08 June 1915 |
Citation | 165 Ky. 289,176 S.W. 1149 |
Parties | FERGUSON v. AKERS. |
Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County, Chancery Branch, First Division.
Suit by E. H. Ferguson against M. L. Akers to recover possession of shares of stock. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
W. G Dearing, of Whitesburg, for appellant.
Wm. W Crawford, of Louisville, for appellee.
On June 4, 1909, the appellant, Ferguson, submitted to the appellee Akers, the following proposition in writing:
This proposition was accepted by Akers, and the 346 1/2 shares of stock mentioned in the first paragraph, as well as the stock mentioned in the second paragraph, which consisted of 448 1/2 shares, was delivered to Ferguson by the Fidelity Trust Company, in whose possession all of this stock was.
In August, 1913, Ferguson brought this suit in equity against Akers to recover the possession of the 448 1/2 shares of stock, upon the ground that so much of the proposition heretofore set out as released to Akers all the interest Ferguson had in the 448 1/2 shares was a mistake; that he did not propose to sell his interest in this stock, and did not know that the proposition contained any agreement that it should be transferred to Akers. He further set up that he signed the agreement without reading the second paragraph thereof, and that Akers well knew that it was not contemplated or agreed to that he should become the owner of any part of this stock in the event he accepted the proposition to purchase the 346 1/2 shares.
The answer was a denial of the averments of the petition, and, after the case had been prepared for trial, the chancellor dismissed the petition of Ferguson, and he appeals.
The original proposition submitted by Ferguson to Akers is in the record, and it shows that the entire proposition was written on one side of one sheet of paper,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co. of Chattanooga, Tenn. v. Ramsey
... ... 9 C.J. 1254, § 195; Perry v ... Thomas, 232 Ky. 781, 24 S.W.2d 603; Cole v ... Young, 167 Ky. 600, 181 S.W. 177; Ferguson v ... Akers, 165 Ky. 289, 176 S.W. 1149; Culton v ... Asher, 149 Ky. 659, 149 S.W. 946; Salyer v ... Salyer, 141 Ky. 648, 654, 133 S.W ... ...
-
Provident Life & Acc. Ins. Co., Etc. v. Ramsey
...proof. 9 C.J. 1254, sec. 195; Perry v. Thomas, 232 Ky. 781, 24 S.W. (2d) 603; Cole v. Young, 167 Ky. 600, 181 S.W. 177; Ferguson v. Akers, 165 Ky. 289, 176 S.W. 1149; Culton v. Asher, 149 Ky. 659, 149 S.W. 946; Salyer v. Salyer, 141 Ky. 648, 654, 133 S.W. 556; Kennedy v. Fulton Mercantile C......
-
Southeastern Land Co. v. Jonnard
... ... and false representations, the evidence thereof must be clear ... and convincing. Ferguson v. Akers, 165 Ky. 289, 176 ... S.W. 1149; Cole v. Young, 167 Ky. 602, 181 S.W. 177; ... Johnson v. Gadbery, 174 Ky. 65, 191 S.W. 865; ... Johnson ... ...
-
Graves v. Winer
...gave the plaintiff all that a jury could have given him, and he was not prejudiced by the trial by court. Cf. Ferguson v. Akers, 1915, 165 Ky. 289, 176 S.W. 1149, 1151; Combs v. Burt & Brabb Lumber Co., 1905, 27 Ky.Law Rep. 439, 85 S.W. 227. Hence we shall examine the second question The co......