Scammon v. Campbell

Citations

• 75 Ill. 223

Syllabus

<p>1. Doweb— effect of answer on question of seizin, of husband. On bill for dower the answer admitted that the title at one time was vested in a person of the same name of the complainant’s husband, but required proof of idem tity: Held, that.the question of seizin was not in issue, and that the identity could be shown by parol testimony.</p> <p>2. Same—yearly value when purchasers have made improvements. Where city lots, of which dower is sought, were unimproved when conveyed by the husband of the dowress, and dower cannot be assigned by metes and bounds without prejudice, it is proper, in assessing the yearly value of the dower, to give the widow one-third of the rental value of the lots without the improvements, so long as she may live. Her age and how long she may live are not proper to be considered by the jury in making their assessment.</p> <p>3. Same —joint decree against several owners, erroneous. Where the de fendants in a petition for dower in city lots own undivided interests in the same, and the yearly value of the dower is assessed and the damages, it is error to render a decree against all the defendants jointly and severally for the whole amount so assessed. It should be apportioned among the defendants according to their several interests and a decree entered against each for his proper share thereof.</p> <p>4. Same — decree as to time of payment in lieu of. It is error to require the full payment of a widow’s yearly assessment in lieu of dower, to be paid before the expiration of the year, as, if she should die, she might thereby receive compensation for her interest after her death. Payment may be required quarterly.</p>