Smith v. Williams

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that “equity” is an exception to the “writing requirement of the statute of frauds” (citation omitted)
• “Our case law recognizes exceptions, however, to the writing requirement of the statute of frauds—both actual fraud and equity.”
• “[O]ur courts and the General Assembly have long recognized that [real] property is unique. . . . That principle was the motivation for the development of the remedy of specific performance in vendor/vendee law rather than simple money damages.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

1 case in this archive cites this case.

• Browne v. Stanley
  Supreme Court of The Virgin Islands· 2017-02-02· cited 6×

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Steelvest, Inc. v. Scansteel Service Center, Inc.
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 1991-04-16· cited 1,300×
• Bennett v. Horton
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 1979-12-18· cited 18×
• Dean v. Cassiday
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1889-05-16· cited 15×
• Shelby v. Shelby
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1921-06-10· cited 10×
• Smith v. Ash
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1969-10-03· cited 8×
• Young v. Venters
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)· 1929-06-04· cited 7×
• Blevins v. Blevins
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1911-04-19· cited 3×