Case Name: Luckett's Heirs vs. Stith et al.
Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Decision Date: 1838-06-21
Citations: 7 Dana 307
Docket Number: 
Parties: Luckett’s Heirs vs. Stith et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Kentucky Reports
Volume: 37
Pages: 311–319

Head Matter:
Luckett’s Heirs vs. Stith et al.
[Mr. Owsley for plaintiffs: Mr. Turner and Mr. Hanson for defendants.]
Ejectment..
From the Circuit Court for Clarke County.
June 21.
verdicTmay have-A writ of error will not lie in favor of a successful pltf. in eject-demises) been rendered un der instructions, that the recovery could be had upon one only of and the lessor in another, complains of the instruction as an erroneous decision against his title.
opinion, that, as the object of the suit is to fry the title, as well as to recover the possession, and the party upon whose demise the recovery is had, should be let into possession — if instructions are given against the ' ^ one of several lessors, he is thereby prejudiced, and should be permitted to prosecute to reverse the judg’t, tho’ the nominal pltf. may have succeeded upon other demises. title of au.e.

Opinion:
The
Chief Justice
and
Judge Marshall
concurred in the judgment, dismissing the writ of error, in this case. Judge Ewing, dissenting, delivered their decision, and his own opinion, as follows.
It is the opinion of a majority of .the Court, that, as the possession has been recovered by John Doe, on one of the demises in the declaration, that a writ of error will not lie in his name, in behalf of any of any of the lessors, on any other demise, for an error in the Court in instructing the jury, that a recovery could not be had upon any other demise. That, as the lessors have joined in the suit, and the possession of the whole tract has been recovered, though, upon any one demise, they have attained the object of their suit, and when let into possession, can hold according to their title, and have no right to complain.