Hester v. Barker

Citations

• 42 S.C. 128
• 20 S.E. 52
• 1894 S.C. LEXIS 33

Syllabus

<p>1. Married Woman — Mortgage—Aot oe 1887 — Case Criticised. — Where a married woman executed mortgages in 1890, and therein declared her intention to bind and charge her separate estate, her intention thus declared was effectual to charge her separate estate under the act of 1887 (19 Slat., 819), and the construction of that act in Scottish &c. Company v. Mixson, 38 S. C., 432. Therefore, there was error in receiving testimony to show that the mortgages were given to secure debts of another, and in decreeing on such testimony that the mortgages were invalid.</p> <p>2. Ibid.. — Ibid.—Ibid.—The mortgages having declared the debt, and then declared the intention to charge the separate estate, such charge must relate to all the indebtedness set forth in the mortgage, and cannot be limited to a portion thereof that was contracted for the use of the separate estate.</p>