King v. Hooton

Citations

• 56 Fla. 805

Syllabus

<p>1. In' order to warrant a court of equity in enforcing a claim against a married woman’s separate property and subjecting the same to sale, under the provisions of Section 2 of Article II of the Constitution of Florida of 1885, the bill must distinctly and clearly allege that such married woman had made an agreement in writing for the benefit of her separate property, though it is not required that her husband should unite or join in such agreement. 1</p> <p>2. Where a bill is filed in equity by a real estate broker against a married woman and her husband, under the provisions of Section 2 of Article II of the Constitution of Florida of 1885, to enforce his claim against the separate property of such married woman for his commissions in procuring a purchaser for such property, it is not sufficient simply to allege that such married woman made an agreement in writing‘authorizing such broker to sell such property for a certain fixed price, but the bill rpust further allege that such agreement was made for the benefit of her .separate property. Where no such allegation is contained in the bill and it cannot be reasonably inferred from the allegations contained therein and from such agreement in writing, which is attached thereto and made a part thereof, that a sale of such property for such price would be for the benefit of such married woman’s separate estate, and it is further alleged therein that she and her husband refused and failed to perform such written agreement, such bill is demurrable, as such allegations are not sufficient to sustain a decree to charge and sell the separate property of a married woman for the payment of such claim.</p>