Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Citation
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Parent Document
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Jurisdiction
- Kentucky (state)
- Effective Date
- 1929-06-14
Other Sections in This Document (28)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
- Pack v. Feuchtenberger, 22 S.W.2d 914 (1929)
Full Text
689 chars“The term ended on the 1st of April; she was therefore not bound to quit on the 1st of March. And a special notice to quit on the 1st of March was not equivalent to a general notice to quit, which would have implied a demand of restitution at the end of the term, or to a special notice to quit at that time; for a notice that the appellants would be ready to receive the possession on the 1st of March, and would expect it then, was no certain notification that they would be ready on the 1st of April, and would then expect it. The appellee was therefore not certainly notified that she must surrender on the first of April. *272 See, also, Haley v. Hickman’s Heirs, Litt. Sel. Cas. 266.