Peters v. Wallace
| Decision Date | 02 June 1887 |
| Citation | 4 S.W. 914 |
| Parties | PETERS v. WALLACE and others. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from chancery court, Pendleton county.
C. H. Lee, for appellant.
L. T. Applegate and John H. Barker, for appellees.
It is not necessary to determine the nature or extent of the title acquired by the appellees, who were the purchasers of the land in controversy at the decretal sale had under the judgment of the Campbell chancery court. The appellant, Peters, who brings this ejectment, shows that he divested himself of title by his proceedings in bankruptcy, and is now attempting to maintain the action without any evidence whatever of title in himself. The mere fact that the assignee in bankruptcy declines to sue, or has verbally surrendered his right to the appellant, does not invest the latter with title.
The judgment below is therefore affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chilton v. Metcalf
... ... Olms, 82 Ind. 294; Berry v. Gillis, 17 N.H. 9; ... Seaton v. Hinneman, 50 Ia. 395; Dessan v ... Johnson, 66 How. Prac. 6; Peters v. Wallace, 4 ... S.W. 914; Foraast v. Hyman, 28 N. E. (Ill.) 801; ... Conner v. Express Co., 42 Ga. 37; Malone v ... Martin, 2 S.W. 909; ... ...
-
In re Interpictures, Inc.
...of the claim, or that the trustee was afforded an opportunity to make any election whatsoever in the matter); Peters v. Wallace, 9 Ky.L.R. 215, 4 S.W. 914 (1887) (the mere fact that the assignee in bankruptcy declines to sue in ejectment for land of the bankrupt estate does not constitute a......