Keeton v. Bandy

• Decision Date: 09 June 1903
• Parties: KEETON v. BANDY et al.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

74 S.W. 1047

KEETON v. BANDY et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

June 9, 1903

Appeal from Circuit Court, Magoffin County.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by Genoa Bandy and others against R. L. Keeton. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Reversed.

Jno. W Rodman and R. H. Cooper, for appellant.

W. S Pryor and D. D. Sublett, for appellees.

BARKER J.

The appellees, who are the children and heirs at law of Thomas B Keeton, instituted this action to recover of appellant certain lands described in the petition. The allegations of this pleading are that the appellees are the owners and entitled to the possession of a tract of land situated in Magoffin county, Ky. on the waters of Lick creek, and which is described by metes and bounds, containing 100 acres, more or less; that the appellant holds possession of the land without right, and during the last two years has unlawfully kept appellees out of possession. Appellant, by his answer, pleaded that on the 20th day of January, 1874, Thomas B. Keeton, who was then the owner of the land in question, by deed in writing, properly executed, acknowledged, and delivered, conveyed it to Elizabeth Keeton and himself jointly. In their reply, appellees allege that, after the deed from Thomas B. Keeton to Elizabeth Keeton and appellant had been executed and delivered, certain creditors of Thomas B. Keeton had instituted a legal proceeding against him and the grantees in the deed, for the purpose of obtaining a decree vacating it as fraudulent as to them; that pending this litigation Thomas B. Keeton died intestate, and the notion was revived as against Elizabeth Keeton, who had been appointed administratrix of his estate; that thereafter, by decree, the court vacated and annulled the conveyance in question as being fraudulent as to the then creditors of Thomas B. Keeton. To this, appellant rejoined that, after the judgment vacating the deed in question, he and his mother, who were the grantees thereunder, had paid off and discharged all of the judgment creditors in whose interest the conveyance had been set aside. The affirmative allegations of the rejoinder were controverted of record, and the action transferred to equity, and there heard with the case of Farish Keeton, etc., against R. L. Keeton, and, having been finally submitted to the court for trial, it was adjudged, among other things, that the appellees were the owners and entitled to the possession of the land claimed and described by them in their petition, from which judgment appellant has appealed to this court.

The transcript brought up under the schedule filed by appellant in the court below contains only the pleadings of the parties, the exhibits filed therewith, and the final judgment of the circuit court, and it presents but one question for adjudication, to wit, whether, after the conveyance from Thomas B. Keeton to his wife and stepson, R. L. Keeton, had been set aside as fraudulent as to his...