Henderson v. Perkins

• Decision Date: 25 March 1893
• Citation: 21 S.W. 1035,94 Ky. 207
• Parties: HENDERSON et ux. v. PERKINS.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

21 S.W. 1035

94 Ky. 207

HENDERSON et ux. v. PERKINS.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

March 25, 1893

Appeal from circuit court, Edmonson county.

To be officially reported.

Action by W. C. Perkins against L. D. Henderson and wife for the specific performance of a contract for the sale of land, and to establish and enforce a vendor's lien. From a judgment in plaintiff's favor defendants appeal. Reversed.

Lewis McQuown, for appellants.

W. E Settle and E. W. Hines, for appellee.

HAZELRIGG J.

The appellant L. D. Henderson was the owner of a farm of 110 acres, situated in Barren county, Ky. and the appellee owned a storehouse and lot at Rocky Hill station, and lands adjoining, to the extent of some 50 acres, situated in Edmonson county. By written contract of December 13, 1889 Perkins sold his property to Henderson in consideration of the sum of $4,000 and the latter's farm of 110 acres. One thousand dollars was to be paid down, and balance on February 25, 1890, when possession was mutually to be given, Perkins covenanting to make deed of general warranty when the purchase money was fully paid. Henderson paid the $1,000 down, and also an additional $1,000 in a few weeks after the trade. On January 31, 1890, the storehouse burned, and the appellee, after unavailing effort to carry out the contract brought this action against Henderson and his wife in the Edmonson circuit court to enforce the contract, and to that end asked that his lien for the remaining unpaid purchase money be enforced by a sale of the Edmonson county lands. He tendered a deed for the lands he had contracted to convey. The defendants, having been summoned only in Barren county pleaded to the jurisdiction; controverted the statements of the writing; set up that Perkins had no title in fee or otherwise to the land; and further, that the contract should not be enforced, because Perkins had burned his storehouse to get the insurance on his goods therein, or else it was burned by his negligence. The lower court sustained a demurrer to the plea of want of jurisdiction, and on hearing gave judgment for the enforcement of the contract, adjudged a sale of the Edmonson county lands to the unpaid purchase price, and adjudged that Henderson and wife should convey the Barren county lands to Perkins. The grounds relied on by Henderson to reverse this judgment are: (1) The Edmonson court had no jurisdiction; (2) the contract is within the statute of frauds; (3) Perkins had no title to the property; (4) he burned his storehouse to get the insurance on the goods; (5) the judgment erroneously directs Henderson and his wife to convey the Barren county lands to Perkins.

On the subject of jurisdiction it may be said that the general rule is undoubtedly that actions to enforce contracts or to rescind them are transitory, and not local, yet when the enforcement involves a...