clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 3, Page 364   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

384 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.
In the cases which have been decided in this State, since the
Act of 1818, ch. 193, which gives the wife dower in an equi-
table estate, the wife was denied her dower, because the hus-
band's estate was divested during his lifetime. No case has
been decided in which it has been held that a mere executory
contract to convey by the husband has had the effect to defeat
the dower, and certainly no case can be found in which the
wife's right to dower in a legal estate of inheritance in the hus-
band, either in deed or in law, has been defeated by the act of
the husband without the concurrence of the wife, where the
act was performed after the inception of the right of dower.
Here, the contract of 1839, which was made after the right
to dower had attached, is relied upon. But that contract was
never consummated; nor had the purchaser in the lifetime of
the husband, nor has he now, put himself in a condition, by
paying the money, to demand its fulfilment. And after the
date of it, the husband took to himself the legal title, which
deprived him of the power of defeating his wife's right to
dower, without her consent. My opinion, therefore, is, that
she is entitled to dower, or an equivalent in money.
It appears that $3,500 of the money, paid by Berry to
Bowie, was applied by the latter, in payment of the land; and
this sum, I think, should be deducted from the value of the
land, as ascertained at the death of Mr. Bowie, before the
dower, or its equivalent, is awarded the complainant. To
that extent, I regard the defendant as occupying, by substitu-
tion, the place of those who sold it to Mr. Bowie; and as the
dower-claim could not be enforced to their prejudice, so neither
can it as against Berry, so far as he stands, by substitution,
in their shoes.
I do not, however, think that Mr. Berry can set off this
sum of $3,500 against the dower. That would be to defeat
the claim altogether, and would place him in a better situation
than the parties to whom Mr. Bowie paid the money. Mr.
Bowie paid, out of his own means, the difference between the
price he was to pay for the land, and the $3,500 paid by Berry,
and which he applied to pay for the land. How much Mr.

 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 3, Page 364   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  August 16, 2024
Maryland State Archives