Bain & Bro. v. Buff's Adm'r
Citations
- 76 Va. 371
- 1882 Va. LEXIS 41
Syllabus
<p>1. Married Women—Separate estate.—It is settled in Virginia that a wife may make her separate estate liable for her own debts, or those of her husband, or other person; unless the instrument creating the estate, expressly or impliedly denies or limits such power.</p> <p>2. Idem.—Her power to alien or charge her estate may be denied or limited in its creation, expressly or impliedly, but the intention so to do must be clear.</p> <p>3. Case here.—Father by will directed that certain part of his estate be paid over to his daughter for the sole and separate use of herself and child or children, during her life, and after her death to be vested in fee in her child or children. Afterwards, in 1871, daughter drew two drafts on her trustee for §500 and for §2,026.58, which were duly accepted by the trustee 1 ‘ payable when funds are in my hands payable to her. ” The money for which said drafts were given was due by her husband, or advanced by B to him to pay his debts, or to embark in business. Hot being paid at maturity, suit was brought to subject her separate estate for their payment.</p> <p>Held:</p> <p>' 1. The estate was settled on her for her' separate use during her life. Power to dispose of and to bind it for debts, was not denied her, or limited.</p> <p>2. The words “for the sole and separate use of herself and child or children,” &c., do not give any estate to the child or children, but indicate the motive for the gift to the mother. See Leake, Trustee v. Benson and others, 29 Gratt. 153.</p> <p>3. She had power to bind her estate by the drafts, and as she could not bind herself personally, she must have meant, by drawing the drafts, to bind her estate.</p> <p>4. There is no proof that the drafts were procured from her by fraud.</p> <p>5. The drafts were not without consideration, but were for loan of money to her or her husband at her request.</p> <p>6. The act of limitations does not apply to the case. The drafts being drawn on her trust fund and accepted as
Judges: Burks
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
14 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Beecher v. Wilson, Burns & Co.Supreme Court of Virginia· 1888-04-26· cited 29×
- Seibel v. RappSupreme Court of Virginia· 1888-05-10· cited 16×
- Stace v. BumgardnerSupreme Court of Virginia· 1892-11-17· cited 16×
- Mauzy v. MauzySupreme Court of Virginia· 1884-10-07· cited 15×
- Wilmoth v. WilmothWest Virginia Supreme Court· 1890-12-10· cited 14×
- Freeman v. EachoSupreme Court of Virginia· 1884-04-17· cited 12×
- Walke & Wife v. MooreSupreme Court of Virginia· 1898-03-31· cited 11×
- Tyack v. BerkeleySupreme Court of Virginia· 1902-03-13· cited 10×
- Christian & Gunn v. KeenSupreme Court of Virginia· 1885-04-02· cited 9×
- Richardson v. Seevers' Adm'rSupreme Court of Virginia· 1888-01-05· cited 7×
- Thomas v. HouseSupreme Court of Virginia· 1926-09-23· cited 7×
- Seamonds v. HodgeWest Virginia Supreme Court· 1892-03-26· cited 5×
- Waller's Adm'r v. Catlett's Ex'orsSupreme Court of Virginia· 1887-05-12· cited 5×
- Remke v. RemkeCourt of Appeals of Tennessee· 1929-12-06· cited 2×
Cites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Penn v. WhiteheadSupreme Court of Virginia· 1867-06-15· cited 45×
- Burnett v. Hawpe's ex'orSupreme Court of Virginia· 1874-11-19· cited 25×
- Darnall v. Smith's adm'rSupreme Court of Virginia· 1875-11-25· cited 24×
- Garland v. PamplinSupreme Court of Virginia· 1879-10-13· cited 22×
- Bank of Greensboro' v. ChambersSupreme Court of Virginia· 1878-03-15· cited 19×
- Justice v. EnglishSupreme Court of Virginia· 1878-07-15· cited 15×
- Walden v. StrongSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1842-03-15· cited 2×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.