Lewis v. Mason's Adm'r

Citations

• 84 Va. 731
• 10 S.E. 529
• 1885 Va. LEXIS 1

Syllabus

<p>1. Post-Nuptial Settlements—Burden of proof.—Such settlements are presumably voluntary. Burden of proving valuable consideration rests on those claiming under them. Where bill alleges them to be voluntary, answer denying the allegation does not shift the burden. The defence must be proved. Hatcher v. Crews, 78 Va., 460.</p> <p>2. Assignments—Choses in action.—It is essential to an assignment of a chose in action that it be delivered.</p> <p>3. Idem—Personalrepresentatives—Possession—Presumption.—Where the assignment of a chose in action is to one who afterwards becomes personal representative of assignor, his subsequent possession is not evidence of delivery by assignor.</p> <p>4. Fraudulent Conveyances—Voluntary gifts—Case at bar.—G. held bond of S. payable to himself. He endorsed it “ I hereby assign this bond to my wife for her sole and separate use,” &c. G. was indebted at the time. After his death:</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>The endorsement did not operate as a gift to, or a settlement upon her, because of want of proof of a delivery and also of a valuable consideration.</p> <p>5. Personal Representative—Devastavit.—Such fiduciaries are chargeable with all personal estate of decedent, and it is chargeable in their hands with his debts. If they deliver it to a testamentary trustee before the debts are paid, they are guilty of devastavit.</p> <p>6. Statute of Limitations—Burden of proof.—On one pleading the bar of this statute lies the burden of proving that his case comes within it. Quiere: Do “goods and chattels” include dioses inaction? See Kirkland, Chase & Co. v. Brune, 31 Gratt., 126; Gordon v. Rixey, 76 Va., 703; Dailey v. Warren, 80 Va., 512.</p>