First Natchez Bank v. Moss

Citations

• 52 La. Ann. 1524

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. A wife, separated in property from her husband by a Judgment, can invest her money in a corporation and become the owner of some of its shares and receive dividends free from claims on the part of her husband or of any of his creditors. The fact that the husband assisted in the management of the company, without charging therefor, does not have the effect of changing her title to her shares in the corporation or her rights to the dividend from bier ‘to him, nor does it reinstate the dissolved community.</p> <p>2. A wife separate in property should contribute to the extent of her ability to the expenses of the family and to the education of the children.</p> <p>S. It follows that the same rule should control the husband; that he may, though absolutely insolvent, work so as to contribute to the expenses of the family and to the education of the children. If this work should result in increasing the wife’s revenue to a moderate extent, this would not render her liable for the debts of her husband. The property and the business were hers. The husband chose to work for nothing so that she might get some return from the business. It all being hers, it is not subject to seizure for his liabilities. The management of the property was her management and not his, and the property and business of the wife served her interest and not his.</p> <p>4. The testimony of the wife, as to the loan she invested in the company or firm in which the husband is employed, is supported by corroborating circumstances sufficient to sustain the loan as having been made by her and not by her husband. Tim latter had limited means, but it does not appear that the wife’s loan to the company or Arm was taken therefrom.</p>