Whitsell v. Porter

10 Citing cases

  1. Appleby v. Buck

    351 S.W.2d 494 (Ky. Ct. App. 1961)   Cited 14 times
    In Appleby v. Buck, Ky., 351 S.W.2d 494 (1961), we pointed out that an oil and gas lease is an interest in real estate within the meaning of the statute of frauds.

    The concept of "joint adventure" is a hazy one. Bogert, Trusts Trustees, § 488. In Whitsell v. Porter, 1949, 309 Ky. 247, 217 S.W.2d 311, 314, on which appellants place great reliance, it was said that a joint adventure may exist for the limited purpose of acquiring title to property. If so, the acquisition and division of their interests among the several parties completes the venture insofar as it is a combined effort, and it would seem immaterial whether they intend thereafter to manage the enterprise jointly or to go their various ways, as would be usual in the trading of mineral interests.

  2. Eubank v. Richardson

    353 S.W.2d 367 (Ky. Ct. App. 1962)   Cited 10 times

    A joint adventure is an informal association of two or more persons, partaking of the nature of a partnership, usually, but not always, limited to a single transaction in which the participants combine their money, efforts, skill, and knowledge for gain, with each sharing in the expenses and profits or losses. In furtherance of the joint adventure, property, including real estate, may be acquired and owned jointly although the title may be taken in the name of one of them. Jones v. Nickell, 297 Ky. 81, 179 S.W.2d 195; Whitsell v. Porter, 309 Ky. 247, 217 S.W.2d 311; 30 Am.Jur., Joint Adventures, Sections 1, 6, 10, 11, and 15, pages 938, 943, 945, 946, and 949; 48 C.J.S. Joint Adventures Sections la, 7(4), 11a, pages 801, 833, and 837. A joint adventure has been held distinguishable from joint ownership and tenancy in common, in that the latter lacks the feature of adventure. Bond v. O'Donnell, 205 Iowa 902, 218 N.W. 898, 63 A.L.R. 901; Hathaway v. Porter Royalty Pool, 296 Mich. 90, 295 N.W. 571, 138 A.L.R. 955, amended 296 Mich. 733, 299 N.W. 451, 138 A.L.R. 967.

  3. Lyon v. Whitsell

    245 S.W.2d 926 (Ky. Ct. App. 1952)   Cited 9 times

    CLAY, Commissioner. Appellants seek to recover attorneys' fees paid by them while prosecuting a suit to recover land from the principal appellee, Whitsell. Appellants were successful in the former litigation, reported as Whitsell v. Porter, 309 Ky. 247, 217 S.W.2d 311. The lower Court sustained a general demurrer to their petition. The basis of this action is that appellees were trustees who fraudulently sought to deprive appellants, the beneficiaries, of their property.

  4. Granik v. Perry

    418 F.2d 832 (5th Cir. 1969)   Cited 8 times
    In Granik, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed a decision of the district court that had granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment on both a breach of a joint venture claim and on two equitable claims.

    Justice Cardozo's opinion in Meinhard v. Salmon, 249 N.Y. 458, 164 N.E. 545, 62 A.L.R. 1 (1928), relied upon in Donahue, is the leading authority in the field. See also, Horne v. Holley, 167 Va. 234, 188 S.E. 169 (1936); Whitsell v. Porter, 309 Ky. 247, 217 S.W.2d 311 (1949). The joint venturer may not acquire the property for himself to the exclusion of his co-venturer, and if he acquires it he holds it as constructive trustee with a duty to account to his associates.

  5. Abbott v. Chesley

    413 S.W.3d 589 (Ky. 2013)   Cited 44 times
    In Abbott v. Chesley, 413 S.W.3d 589 (Ky.2013), we determined that the circuit court properly entered summary judgment against Cunningham, Gallion, and Mills on the breach of fiduciary duty claim.

    Jones, 179 S.W.2d at 196.See also Whitsell v. Porter, 309 Ky. 247, 217 S.W.2d 311, 313 (1949) (“So similar are they that the principles which govern the rights and the liabilities of members of a partnership apply and govern a joint adventure, and the responsibilities are tested by partnership rules.”). KRS 362.220 provides that “all partners shall be liable: (a) Jointly and severally for everything chargeable to the partnership under KRS 362.210 and 362.215[.

  6. Abbott v. Chesley

    2011-SC-000291-DG (Ky. Aug. 29, 2013)

    Jones, 179 S.W.2d at 196. See also Whitsell v. Porter, 217 S.W.2d 311, 313 (Ky. 1949) ("So similar are they that the principles which govern the rights and the liabilities of members of a partnership apply and govern a joint adventure, and the responsibilities are tested by partnership rules."). KRS 362.220 provides that "all partners shall be liable: (a) Jointly and severally for everything chargeable to the partnership under KRS 362.210 and 362.215[.

  7. McIlwain v. Doby

    120 So. 2d 553 (Miss. 1960)   Cited 4 times

    Pitchford v. Howard, 208 Miss. 567, 45 So.2d 142; Rhoads v. Peoples Bank, 200 Miss. 606, 42 So.2d 427; Risk v. Risher, 197 Miss. 155, 19 So.2d 484; Sample v. Romine, supra; Saulsberry v. Saulsberry, 223 Miss. 684, 78 So.2d 758; Stovall v. Stovall, 218 Miss. 364, 67 So.2d 391; Sunflower Farms v. McLean, 233 Miss. 72, 101 So.2d 355; Triplett v. Bridgeforth, supra; 54 Am. Jur., Sec. 225 p. 173. C. Appellees do not have to hold actual title at the time of foreclosure, nor do all of the beneficiaries have to have actual knowledge of the arrangements being made in their behalf by some of them. Chichester v. Chichester, 209 Miss. 628, 48 So.2d 123; Johnson v. Belmont, 172 Ark. 851, 291 S.W. 77; Raper v. Thorn (Okla.), 211 P.2d 1007, 14 A.L.R. 2d 1260; Rimmer v. Austin, 191 Miss. 664, 4 So.2d 224; Rome v. Fincke (Fla.), 53 So.2d 712; Shepherd v. Johnston, supra; Whitsell v. Porter, 309 Ky. 247, 217 S.W.2d 311; 12 Am. Jur., Sec. 278 p. 830. II. The Chancellor properly admitted testimony as to statements of the deceased, Mrs. Lee Beard.

  8. Bradbury v. Nagelhus

    319 P.2d 503 (Mont. 1957)   Cited 15 times

    R.C.M. 1947, section 49-121 (Maxims of Jurisprudence); Rae v. Cameron, 1941, 112 Mont. 159, 114 P.2d 1060; 30 Am. Jur., Joint Adventures, sections 4 and 5, pages 678-679, section 34, page 695; 40 Am.Jur., Partnership, section 3, page 127, sections 17 and 18, pages 136-137; 68 C.J.S., Partnership, section 1(4), page 403, section 6, b, page 409; 48 C.J.S., Joint Adventures, section 1 a, page 801, section 1(6), page 806, section 5, b and c, pages 822, 823; Annot., 138 A.L.R. 968; Annot. 63 A.L.R. 909; Annot. 48 A.L.R. 1055; 4 Pomeroy, Equity Jurisprudence, section 1044, page 93, section 1053, page 119 (5th ed.); II Scott, Trusts, section 170, page 1193 (2d ed.); Pacific Atlantic Wine, Inc. v. Duccini, 111 Cal.App.2d 957, 245 P.2d 622, 626-627; Whitsell v. Porter, 309 Ky. 247, 217 S.W.2d 311. "* * * a constructive trust is not based on the intention of the parties but is imposed by the court in the interests of justice, to redress a wrong or to prevent unjust enrichments."

  9. Kincaid v. Miller

    272 P.2d 276 (Colo. 1954)   Cited 15 times

    " See, also, Wynne v. Gibson, 167 Okla. 114, 27 P.2d 849. A well-considered case in which many of the pertinent authorities are reviewed is that of Whitsell v. Porter, 309 Ky. 247, 217 S.W.2d 311. There the heirs of one Kirkwood owned an undivided three-fifths interest in a certain tract of land which was being sold at a judicial sale. The property contained coal, and the heirs decided to buy the property at the judicial sale.

  10. 20th Century Coal Company v. Taylor

    275 S.W.2d 72 (Ky. Ct. App. 1955)   Cited 9 times

    It has been held not to apply to a profit sharing agreement such as the one here in controversy. See Jones v. Nickell, 297 Ky. 81, 179 S.W.2d 195, and Whitsell v. Porter, 309 Ky. 247, 217 S.W.2d 311. The defendant further contends there was an accord and satisfaction because about a year after the agreement was made the plaintiff accepted a $1,000 check from the defendant.