Houston Hedges and Robert Hedges discussed what the next step would be on the farm. There are only two possibilities, keep the land or sell. Keeping the land was an absolute given, and once that basic decision is made, the only thing remaining to decide is how to produce the most of some products to sell - that is - how best to make money.

RULE #1, never to be broken was KEEP THE LAND . . . personal sacrifice may be necessary . . . BUT KEEP THE LAND . . . "One Generation passeth away and another generation cometh, but the land endureth forever . . . " With this as a given, and all other agreements, actions and premises predicated upon this, the circumstances are easy to lay out in their entire pattern from 1972. This is known as THE PROMISE. According to the Promise, someone needed to operate the Hedges farm. Houston said that if the farm were divided it would not last one generation. Therefore he would not divide it. This is prima facia evidence that he intended that it should last several generations.

Robert Hedges did not change the farm's business immediately after discharge from the Army in 1972, but his return to public work increased his income and reduced economic pressure on Houston Hedges who had cosigned for the two auto loans which Robert was still paying off. Robert began to plan his education (investment#3) and his family also (investment#4).

Robert Hedges agreed to try to operate the Hedges Farm as a business with income and return to the investment which was sadly lacking for several years. He did not agree to return from the Army and pay rent so that Houston Hedges could have a man working for him as in the past. When the lawyers for the FMHA were finished, the old dairy was finished also. No reasonable man would buy equipment to farm with no experience at all in farming. The local farmers were not making the farm produce adequately, and were not inclined to increase production and thereby support the continuity of Hedges ownership because they wanted to be able to purchase the land. A healthy business which makes a return to investment is worth more than an anemic business without adequate return. The 1957 Corvette show car was on the road, and he was now ready to devote his attention to the next large investment, which is a dwelling. (investment#2) He had decided to give up building a race car while a student during 1974 and 1975. This decision was made because of the impracticality of racing, his finding fulfillment in other arenas, the cost of gasoline, his plans to build a house, and the needs of the farm. He sold his race car parts individually. This capital was available for the farm application.

Houston Hedges made plans to pass his estate (the farm) in an orderly fashion and consulted with Robert M. Cootes, a local Taylorsville Attorney, in 1975. The purpose of the legal consultation with R. M. Cootes was to plan the deeding of the land. R. M. Cootes had suggested that a minor in the courthouse is a bad situation, and Houston Hedges should wait until John Hedges is 18 years old. John Hedges was aged 16 and Robert Hedges was aged 25. Houston Hedges returned to Fern Creek that day and described this consultation to Robert. worked on each and every of the 355 acres of this farm, because being the owner of 33.34% of each acre would require the ONE manager, Robert Hedges, to have a plan for production and profit and a necessary return on investment for each and every acre. A business needs to produce on 100% of it's capital investment [land].

The testimony of the lawyer, R. M. Cootes, will be the proof of the consultation and intention. The consultation will be evident in his records kept for billing purposes. If Houston were proven to have lied about this consultation this would indicate he had a plan to deceive and defraud his son from the start. The agreement or contract is made in the beginning, and this is the beginning of one phase. Robert does not believe such a deception was planned. The proof of this consultation to deed an undivided part of this farm to Robert identifies the motivation for Robert to invest so much time and money in this land. Houston Hedges also promised to exchange work on two houses, with one house to be for Houston and the other house for Robert. Robert was ready to begin his house in 1975.

Houston had said that he intended to deed John Hedges a third undivided interest also, and he didn't say what future disposition he had intended for the remaining third which he would reserve for himself. Had Houston suggested that he intended to divide the farm up, Robert would have restricted his invested hours and dollars to the portion which would have been pointed out as his legacy. This reduction of efforts would have occurred even if the least-valuable of the acres had been chosen by Houston as the legacy for Robert. John Hedges is handicapped, and was not then employed, nor as a practical matter able to drive a motor vehicle, and the responsibility was upon Robert Hedges to make every farm acre produce.

The farm was not to be sold, and this seemed like a suitable place to build a house. Had there not been a old historical Hedges farm, Robert would have devoted his time and land-oriented investments to some alternate property priced in the then-market. Robert had been offered a 5 acre tract on Aiken Rd. near Middletown, in 1973, while he was employed in public work, and while he was still financially stable. This would have been satisfactory for the house he planned. Robert had been drawing houses and making models of them since high school. He could have sold the 1957 Corvette at this time, and invested in his house, or in land, if the farm had not been and was not to be a major factor in his life.

The farm needed to be tended correctly for long term income however, and this absorbed his time, his attention to detail and all his available money. Robert has taken responsibility for more and invested far more than an ordinary dutiful son would have done. Rather than searching for public work while fresh with excellent college grades and recent job market experience, he focused of all the waking hours on the farm. The farm represented a very important lifetime investment so the method he adopted was to be very economical but spare no necessary expense because this land is forever. Every thought and every decision about any future plans were hinged on the farm as a domicile and a place to raise children. No plan could be implemented if it included being too far from the farm to commute. Employment or education anywhere else was therefore impossible. This is the juncture where promissory estoppel becomes a binding legal obligation by Houston Hedges to Robert Hedges.

Houston made an offer, a promise, a prediction, an agreement, a statement that " you have an interest in this property . . . you have a responsibility . . . we have much work to do, and thereafter many additional daily requests to lift this, haul that, fix the other, pick up your brother at ______, take your brother to ________, haul your brother some lumber at school.....can you pick me up some _____________ . we need some __________ ." all added up to a constant need by those who had promised the 33.334% of the old family heritage land to Robert Hedges.

Houston Hedges had his domicile in an inconvenient location [on the rural 355 acres in question] as an incapacitated elderly non-driving man, who still owned a house in a small community where he could have walked to the doctor's office, the drug store, the post office, the bank, and a small grocery, rather than having his son Robert Hedges [or a hired man] transport he and Catherine to Fern Creek for these frequent errands. The house in Fern Creek was on a bus line, and would have furnished a certain amount of independent autonomy, for travel to the Baptist Hospital, Oak Drug Store, the Suburban Doctor's Centers, and the Church. The fact that the land was kept then is an indicator that the subsequent sale is not in keeping with the rules under which this "game has been played" since the inception. Catherine Gimbert Hedges had her ashes scattered on the landscaped land, and her beloved flowers bloom as she planned. The land could have been sold parcel at a time, in a good market, and the funds invested in "SuperCDs" with a reasonable return and the deceased Houston Hedges and Catherine Gimbert Hedges would have had sufficient income rather than a hobby requiring full time management.

The folks had come to believe that a depression was nigh, and their experiences from the 1930's strongly influenced their actions. This belief was fostered by high interest rates, various other economic indicators, and bad advice from nay-sayers. They might have been convinced that the war in the MidEast signaled the end of the world as we know it.

After the existence of the PROMISE by Houston Hedges {A} to "deed" 33.334% of the family farm to Robert Hedges {B} is established....there are only two possibilities....either an unexecuted intention or fraudulent intent from the start on the part of Houston Hedges toward Robert Hedges. [note2] but an Estoppel exists between the parties. [note3]

[note2] Allegations concerning A (decd.) alleged oral agreements to make will (promise to bequeath unto) transferring property to B (Pltf) in return for their care of property ( in return for some consideration duly performed) was sufficient to state claims for "breach of oral contract", "unjust enrichment", express and implied trust. - Hellickson v Jenkins 796 P2d 150. (Idaho App 1990)

[U]pon Breach of contract by A, B may stand by election to rescind and recover value (expended) or stand and recover for breach. Columbian Fuel v Skidmore, 214 SW2d 761, (Ky 1948)

[A] cannot breach contract and being in default thereby secure for A some advantage or right to detriment of B. Miles v Profitt 266 SW 2d 333, (Ky 1954)

[I]ntentional violation by A of a contract fully executed by B will not absolve A from liability for debt arising due B. Moore v Rogers 43 SW2d 31, (Ky 1931)

The preceeding case law is merely a small part of a 450 page case labeled 91-CI-0021, which cites about 60 pages of contract law which KY recognizes.