Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Citation
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Parent Document
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Jurisdiction
- Kentucky (state)
- Effective Date
- 1979-12-18
Other Sections in This Document (31)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
- Bennett v. Horton, 592 S.W.2d 460 (1979)
Full Text
1,332 charsThe trial judge made and filed certain findings of fact and conclusions of law. From the conflicting evidence he found that (1) the subject property was owned by movant and he was entitled to its possession; (2) respondents and movant had negotiated toward the sale and purchase of the subject property; (3) there was no contract or agreement between movant and respondents for the purchase and sale of the subject property; (4) movant rented the subject property to the respondents, with respondents having the privilege at some unspecified future time to purchase it for $75,000; (5) respondents should be required to vacate the subject property and to take their personal property with them; (6) respondents made certain improvements to the premises; (7) respondents were not entitled to recover of the movant for any such improvements which had been made; (8) certain of the personal property received by movant were actually gifts from respondents; (9) the statute of frauds was applicable to the disposition of the issue and to whether there was an enforceable contract and adjudged that it was not; (10) movant should recover damages from the respondents in the sum of $3,200; and (11) movant paid to or for respondents in their joint ventures the sum of approximately $30,000 and received approximately the sum of $21,- *464