Skip to main content
· 1/16/1894

Erringdale v. Riggs

Citations

  • 148 Ill. 403
  • 36 N.E. 93

Syllabus

<p>1. Husband and wife—right.of husband to wife’s personal, property, at common law. It was a rule of the common law that chattels personal or money in possession of the wife at the time of her marriage at once became the property of the husband. This rule also made after-acquired personal estate coming in possession of the wife the property of the husband, unless settled as her equitable separate estate.</p> <p>2. Same—resulting trust in favor of wife by use of her property. A husband and wife were married in 1827 in Kentucky, and came to this State and bought land in 1834. It was claimed that the land was purchased with the money and means of the wife, and therefore a resulting trust arose in her favor: Held, that as any money or personal property belonging to the wife, in her possession at and from the time of her marriage to the time of the purchase of the land, had become the property of the husband, the purchase in the husband’s name, with his wife’s money, vested in him the absolute title, free from any resulting trust in favor of the wife.</p> <p>3. Same—contract between husband and wife in 1834, void. A contract between a husband arid wife, made in 1854, for the division of the husband’s lands, under the common law then in force, is absolutely void, and can not be specifically enforced. The rule in this respect is the same in equity as at law.</p> <p>4. Statute of Frauds—part performance to take verbal contract out of the statute. A husband and wife entered on land of the former in 1834, and the wife continued on the land, with her husband, until 1854, when he went to Texas leaving her in possession. At the time he left it was claimed that he made a verbal contract with her to convey her the land. She complied with the terms of the contract, and made some slight improvements on the land, which were more than compensated by the rents and profits, and during her occupancy, alter her husband left, the land was assessed in his name, and no act or declaration of

Judges: Phillips

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.