A Treatise on the Legal and Equitable Rights of Married Women; As Well in Respect to Their Property and Persons as to Their Children. with an Appendix of the Recent American Statutes and the Decisions Under Them

A Treatise on the Legal and Equitable Rights of Married Women; As Well in Respect to Their Property and Persons as to Their Children. with an Appendix of the Recent American Statutes and the Decisions Under Them

By (author) 

List price: US$35.81

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1861 edition. Excerpt: ...and that if she survived, her whole fortune, together with her plate and jewels, should be settled to her own use; and that if she died first, then that her fortune should be at her own disposal. B. signed a duplicate of the paper; on the same day A. made her will, duly executed to pass freehold property, giving the interest of her fortune to B., her intended husband; and after specific devises (but not mentioning the reversion in the premises), she gave her estate and residuary effects to B., whom she appointed executor. On the same day the marriage was solemnized, and A. afterwards died before B. without issue. The question was between B., the husband's devisee, and the heir of A., who claimed the property under the presumption that the will of A. was revoked by her marriage; and so the court determined; for as the will was made before the marriage it was revoked, and it was not supported by the agreement, which was not a deed for want of '2 T. R. 684; see Hodsden v. Lloyd, 2 B. C. C. 534. a seal, so that it could not operate as a covenant by the husband to stand seised to uses. Ashurst, J., observed that the agreement referred to an executory act, and not to the will made prior to the marriage; he said it might have been a great doubt whether it could have been agreed that the marriage should not revoke the will, even if there had been words for that purpose, because it would be a stipulation in direct opposition to a positive rule of law.1 810. In Massachusetts, the Supreme Court of Judicature held "that a feme covert cannot, even with the consent of her husband, devise lands to exclude her heir; but she may dispose of chattels or money with his assent, for he alone is interested to question her authority." In the same case...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 280 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 15mm | 503g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • Miami Fl, United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236557360
  • 9781236557360