|Court of Appeals of Kentucky.|
|HENSLEY et al. v. HENSLEY.|
|April 16, 1895.|
Appeal from circuit court, Clay county.
"Not to be officially reported."
Action by Henry Hensley and others against Silas B. Hensley to cancel and set aside a deed.
From a judgment of dismissal, plaintiffs appeal.
In May, 1889, Robert J. Hensley conveyed to the appellee, Silas B. Hensley, about 250 acres of land in Clay county, Ky., the expressed conditions being that the vendee should pay or had paid $200, and should also furnish the vendor and his wife, Margret H. Hensley, during each of their lives, with diet, clothing, and, when necessary, with nursing and medical attention, and treating them humanely and kindly, and at their death to have them decently buried. The conveyance has the following provision, viz.: "It is expressly understood, and this conveyance is made with the express understanding, that, should Silas B. Hensley, party of the second part, fail to perform in any particular or part of his part of the contract, then this land herein described is to revert to said Robert J. Hensley and wife, Margret H. Hensley, both, or either which may be living at the time of such failure to perform the contract." The vendor died some time after the execution of the conveyance, and part of his children and heirs instituted this suit, alleging that appellee had in all respects failed to comply with his part of the contract, and that he procured the execution of same by fraudulently promising to perform the service, etc., mentioned in the deed; and they seek to have the deed canceled and set aside. A general demurrer was sustained to the petition, and the suit dismissed, and plaintiffs have appealed, and ask a reversal.
It appears from the petition the appellee resided with the vendor during his life on said land, and now resides there, with the other beneficiary of the deed. It does not appear that either the vendor or his wife ever complained of any nonperformance on the part of appellee. The widow of the vendor is not a party to this suit. It does not appear that appellants have suffered any pecuniary loss on account of appellee's failure to perform his part of the contract, and by the terms of the deed the land would, in the event of the cancellation of the deed, revert to the widow. It seems to us that the appellants have failed to show any interest in the land or deed. The demurrer was therefore properly sustained, and petition dismissed.
The judgment is therefore affirmed.
HENSLEY et al. v. HENSLEY.
Last Update Tuesday, 18-Dec-2012 01:32:45 EST
Copyright © 2015 by the KYGenWeb Team. All
rights reserved. Copyright of submitted items
belongs to those responsible for their authorship or
creation unless otherwise assigned.