Case Name: George Nethercutt, et al., v. James R. Bates, et al.
Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Decision Date: 1877-04-10
Citations: 9 Ky. Op. 423
Docket Number: 
Parties: George Nethercutt, et al., v. James R. Bates, et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Kentucky Opinions, containing the unreported opinions of the Court of Appeals
Volume: 9
Pages: 423–423

Head Matter:
George Nethercutt, et al., v. James R. Bates, et al.
Ejectment.
A suit in ejectment is a legal- action and not one in chancery.
Equity Jurisdiction.
Confusion of boundary is a well established head of equity jurisdiction, but it is not every dispute as to boundary that confers jurisdiction on courts of equity. It is necessary that there should be some peculiar equity in the cause itself.
APPEAL FROM CARTER CIRCUIT COURT.
April 10, 1877.
E. B. Wilhoit, for appellants.
J. R. Botts, for appellees.

Opinion:
Opinion by
Judge Cofer :
There does not seem to us to be any matter of equitable cognizance in this case. It was a plain action of ejectment, and the only matters set up in the amended petition which can be supposed to be in any sense equitable was the alleged confusion of boundary. Confusion of boundary is a well established head of equity jurisdiction, but it is not every dispute or uncertainty as to boundary that will confer jurisdiction on courts of equity. It is necessary to the jurisdiction of equity that there should be some peculiar equity in the cause itself, some equitable ground attaching itself to the controversy. Strong's Equity, Sec. 619.
We are,'therefore, of the opinion that the court erred in transferring the cause to^ equity, and for that error the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded with directions to set aside the order transferring the case and to proceed with it at law.