Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Citation
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Parent Document
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Jurisdiction
- Kentucky (state)
- Effective Date
- 1927-01-18
Other Sections in This Document (24)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
- Ashland Auto Sales Co. v. Stock, 290 S.W. 487 (1927)
Full Text
714 chars“The tenant can not relieve himself from the statutory penalty by the mere statement that he believed he had a right to hold the premises. He must furnish reasons sufficient to induce a jury or court hearing the case to believe that he in good faith, based upon reasonable grounds, believed he had a right to remain in possession. YGiether a tenant acts in good faith is a question of fact, and it is admissible for him to show that he laid his ease before a competent attorney and was advised that he had a contract right to remain in possession of the premises. But evidence as to the advice of counsel will not be competent, unless the client placed before him all the facts in his possession relating to case.”