Korfhage v. Com. ex rel. Curlin

Decision Date07 December 1956
Citation296 S.W.2d 476
PartiesGeorge J. KORFHAGE and Mildred G. Korfhage, his Wife, and The Kentucky Trust Company, Appellants, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky and Department of Highways, ex rel. W. P. CURLIN, Commissioner of Highways, and Jefferson County and City of Louisville, Appellees.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

Funk, Chancellor & Marshall, Thomas F. Marshall, Frankfort, Greenebaum, Barnett & Carroll, Louisville, for appellants.

C. Hayden Edwards, Asst. City Atty., Woodward, Hobson & Fulton, Louisville, for appellees.

STEWART, Judge.

This suit was commenced by the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the City of Louisville to condemn land in the city for right of way for the North-South Expressway. The property in litigation was owned by appellants, George J. Korfhage and Mildred Korfhage, his wife, and certain portions of it were burdened with three leases and one sublease of various durations. Some of the leasehold contracts contained an option-renewal clause. By separate actions the same condemnors sought to condemn the interests in the property of the lessees and the sublessee (we shall refer herein to all of the latter as 'leaseholders').

This suit was originally instituted in county court, where it was referred to commissioners who appraised the entire property at $128,900. Upon the filing of the report, appellants excepted and moved that the court refer the matter back to the commissioners to determine separately the values of the leases and the fee estate. The commissioners did so, placing various values on the leases but leaving the total appraisement the same, $128,900. Appellants objected to the method of apportionment of this sum, claiming that the aggregate value of the leases should be added to the value of their property and not subtracted from it. The county court overruled this objection. It then deducted the total appraisal of the leases from the above figure and adjudged the balance to be the value of the fee estate.

Appellants appealed to the circuit court on this point, and appellees appealed also on the question of the amount of damages allowed. This case was consolidated with the suits brought against the leaseholders. Before the action was tried the parties entered into an agreement submitting the case to arbitration in order to fix the value of each interest. The circuit court instructed the arbitrators that they should determine the value of the fee, taking into consideration the values of the leases, and then subtract from that figure the values of the various leases. Appellants once again excepted on the same ground raised in the county court. This exception was overruled and the arbitrators brought in an appraisement of all the interests in the total sum of $124,000, of which amount the lease values were established at $7,250, leaving the value of appellants' interest fixed at $116,750.

No objection was made to any of the appraised values, but appellants still insist the lease values should have been added to and not taken from the value of their fee estate. On this appeal the question addressed to us is whether in determining the value of appellants' property the values of the leasehold interests should be added to the property or deducted therefrom.

The issue raised is one of first impression in this state. However, an examination of the cases in other jurisdictions indicates that the majority of the courts have adopted as the rule the standard used by the county and the circuit courts in this case, i. e. the rule that the value on this property...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Com., Dept. of Highways v. Sherrod
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • 22 Marzo 1963
    ...first the damage to the tract as a whole and then apportion that amount between the landowners and the lessees. See Korfhage v. Commonwealth, Ky., 296 S.W.2d 476; City of Ashland v. Price, Ky., 318 S.W.2d 861. Fourth, the instructions gave no basis at all on which the jury could determine t......
  • City of Ashland v. Price
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • 12 Diciembre 1958
    ...estate as a unit and fix the value thereof or damage thereto separately.' We approved the application of that rule in Korfhage v. Commonwealth, Ky., 296 S.W.2d 476, 477. The appellees submit that the Korfhage case, holding that the value of the lessee's interest should be deducted from the ......
  • City of Ashland v. Kittle
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • 23 Junio 1961
    ...forth the amounts the jury awarded the owners of the fee on the one hand, the tenants of the property on the other. In Korfhage v. Commonwealth, Ky., 296 S.W.2d 476, and in the fairly recent case of City of Ashland v. Price, Ky., 318 S.W.2d 861, 862, in considering the valuing of property t......
  • Coyle v. Capital Engineering Services, Inc.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • 20 Junio 1958
    ...lease. The value of such an interest is ascertainable. Such values are frequently determined in condemnation proceedings. Korfhage v. Commonwealth, Ky., 296 S.W.2d 476; City of Ashland, Kentucky v. Price, Ky., 318 S.W.2d 861. Many factors enter into the determination of the value of an unex......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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