Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Hudgen v. Temple, 51 Ky. 198 (1851)

Citation
Hudgen v. Temple, 51 Ky. 198 (1851)
Parent Document
Hudgen v. Temple, 51 Ky. 198 (1851)
Jurisdiction
Kentucky (state)
Effective Date
1851-07-08

Full Text

1,535 chars
The landlord whose tenant, is entered upon, cannot maintain the wiit of forcible entry and de-tainer. it is on ly the person who is actually possessed and entered upon, that can maintain the writ.
: Forcible entry and detainer can not be maintained by the landlord whose tenant has been entered upon, even though the term of the tenant has expired, and he has left the prem ises before the warrant brought.
*201If Temple entered after the 2d of October, and before the 25th of December, 1849, it was upon the possession in fact, of the tenants of the plaintiff, whose term had not expired, and who alone could maintain this proceeding for such forcible entry. So, likewise, if Temple entered after the expiration of the term of the said tenants, but whilst they still continued upon the plaintiff’s land, and before they delivered back the possession to the plaintiff, it would still be but a forcible entry upon them or upon their actual possession, and they alone, and not the plaintiff, in such case, could maintain this proceeding for a forcible entry. Although the tenants by holding over their term, are guilty of a forcible detainer of the possession from their landlord, and might by this proceeding, at his instance, be compelled to restore the possession to him, yet a forcible entry in the meantime, upon the premises in the actual possession of the tenants, though after the expiration of their term, is a forcible entry upon them and not upon the landlord, who has not yet regained the possession in fact from his tenants.