Pickett v. Peay
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Dower. Plea. The husband was not seized .upon the trial of the cause, and the defendant produced a copy of the will of Reuben Stark, the former husband of Mrs. Pickett, under whose seizin the plaintiffs claim, and contended, from the ample provision made for Mrs. Pickett, in the will of her former husband, that the jury had power of considering such provision as intended by the husband in lieu of dower, although not so expressed in the will.
Read the full summary
Dower. Plea. The husband was not seized .upon the trial of the cause, and the defendant produced a copy of the will of Reuben Stark, the former husband of Mrs. Pickett, under whose seizin the plaintiffs claim, and contended, from the ample provision made for Mrs. Pickett, in the will of her former husband, that the jury had power of considering such provision as intended by the husband in lieu of dower, although not so expressed in the will. Of this opinion was the court, and so directed the jury ; and thereupon a verdict was found for the defendant. The will did not say in lieu of dower, nor…
1Opinion of the Court
,Colcock, J.
Dower is a legal estate, which cannot be barred by any collateral provision, except by jointure before marriage, according to the statute of Henry. It was urged, that ample provision made for the widow, was conclusive evidence that the testator intended it to be in bar of dower. Now, it appears to me, that this would be most vague and uncertain evidence of such an intention, because it would depend upon the opinion of the judge or jury, *546what was ample provision. One devises lands to his wife, and dies. She marries again, and brings dower, and this devise is pleaded in bar of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Kennedy v. NedrowSupreme Court of the United States · 1789
- Larrabee & Wife v. Van AlstyneNew York Supreme Court · 1806
- Webb v. EvansSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1809