Case Name: Boyd et al. v. Town of Martin et al.
Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Decision Date: 1946-12-10
Citations: 303 Ky. 524
Docket Number: 
Parties: Boyd et al. v. Town of Martin et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Kentucky Reports
Volume: 303
Pages: 524–525

Head Matter:
Boyd et al. v. Town of Martin et al.
December 10, 1946.
H. R. Burke and J. B. Clarke for appellants.
Joe Hobson for appellees.

Opinion:
Opinion op the Court by
Judge Cammack
Affirming.
The Town of Martin instituted this action to condemn a small strip of land owned by the appellants. The appellants did not file an answer to the original pe tition, bnt did file exceptions to tbe commissioners' report. Tbe trial in tbe connty conrt resulted in an award of $500. Tbe Boyds appealed to tbe circuit court, and, after bearing evidence on tbe question of tbe necessity of taking tbe land, tbe court adjudged that it was necessary for tbe city to do so. Tbe question of damages was submitted to tbe jury and an award of $700 was made. Tbe appellants failed to file tbeir bill of exceptions in time and tbe lower court refused to sign or approve it when it was offered for filing. When tbe appeal was filed in tbis Court tbe tendered bill of exceptions was incorporated in tbe record and tbe appellee promptly made a motion tbat it be stricken. Tbis motion was sustained.
We are confronted, therefore, witb tbe question as to whether or not tbe pleadings support tbe judgment. Feltner V. Smith, 283 Ky. 783, 143 S. W. 2d 505. We have examined them carefully and find tbat they do.
Judgment affirmed.