McDonald v. Lowry
| Decision Date | 19 April 1899 |
| Citation | 50 S.W. 553 |
| Parties | McDONALD v. LOWRY. [1] |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from circuit court, Fayette county.
"Not to be officially reported."
Action by John C. Lowry against William Ritchey and others to enforce an execution lien on land. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant J. S. McDonald appeals. Reversed.
J. M Tanner, for appellant.
Ed. M Wallace and C. Suydam Scott, for appellee.
It appears from the record in this case that the appellee, J. C Lowry, recovered judgment against William Ritchey in November, 1895, for the sum of $91.25, with interest from November 8, 1892, and for a few other small sums, and that on the 26th of November, 1895, execution issued thereon, and was levied upon about two acres of land in Fayette county, and afterwards appellee instituted this action in equity to obtain a sale of the land in question to satisfy plaintiff's debt. The said Ritchey, in answer to the petition of plaintiff, denied that plaintiff had any lien on the land in controversy, and further averred that he was a bona fide housekeeper, resident of Fayette county, in the state of Kentucky, and had one child, under 21 years of age living with him, and that he was at the time of the said execution living upon the said real estate, and occupying same as a homestead, and is still so living. To this answer a demurrer was sustained, with leave to amend, which it seems, however, the defendant failed to do; and thereupon judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff, as prayed for in the petition. It seems that on the same day appellant, McDonald, filed his petition, seeking to be made a party, and alleged that he had purchased the real estate in controversy from the defendant Ritchey on the 17th day of March, 1896, at the price of $625, and that at the time of his purchase he knew that plaintiff had instituted suit against Ritchey, but did not know that execution had been issued and levied on the land, or even that judgment had been rendered against Ritchey. He further averred that the real estate in controversy had been purchased by Ritchey from one B. Smith in January, 1895, with the proceeds of a house and tract of land which said defendant had owned, and, together with his family, had occupied as a homestead, in Woodford county, Ky. and that he contracted for the real estate in controversy for the purpose of using the same as a homestead, and claimed that it was in fact the...
To continue reading
Request your trial