Rivers v. Rivers

Citations

• 38 Fla. 65

Syllabus

<p>1. It is not erroneous, on motion made for that purpose, to strike out a plea purporting to be an equitable plea which is so indefinite and uncertain in its allegations that it is impossible to tell whether the facts sought to be set up constitute a legal or an equitable defense. Great particularity is required in the framing of such pleas.</p> <p>2. Where a plea purporting to be upon equitable grounds is not sufficient as an equitable plea, it is properly stricken out, and it is erroneous to reinstate it. Yet, as in this case, all the evidence offered by the defendant and received by the court was properly admissible under her plea of not guilty, and fully sustains that plea, it is held that the error in reinstating the plea does not require the reversal of the judgment.</p> <p>3. A deed conveying the property in controversy executed to a married woman by a third party, in consideration of her execution,'jointly with her husband, to him of adeed of the homestead of herself and husband and family, is a conveyance upon a valuable consideration received directly by the third party from such married woman; and when such third party had previously executed to the husband a deed for the same premises so conveyed to the married woman, of which she had no knowledge, and which was not recorded for more than a year after the execution and record of the deed to her, she is to be held a subsequent purchaser without notice and for value, in an action of ejectment brought against her by her husband who had in the time intervening between the execution of the deed to her and the bringing of his action obtained a divorce from her.</p>