Estate of Hauer

Citations

• 140 Pa. 420
• 21 A. 445
• 1891 Pa. LEXIS 855

Syllabus

<p>1. A plain distinction is drawn by the decided cases between the effect of the receipt by a husband of the corpus of his wife’s separate property, and his receipt of the income thereof. While a gift of the principal to him will not be presumed from her mere acquiescence in his receipt and use of it, a gift of income may thus be implied.</p> <p>2. A wife, who permits her husband to receive and use as his own the rents of her separate property, cannot, at his death, recover them from his estate without proof of an understanding that he was to account for them; the presumption being that they were used in maintaining the family and were given to the husband for that purpose.</p> <p>8. Express or direct proof of the wife’s acquiescence is unnecessary. It will be implied from circumstances, and a course of conduct consistent with it and opposed to any other conclusion; and it is sufficiently shown when it appears that the receipt of the rents was with her knowledge, and could easily have been prevented by her if she had desired to do so.</p>