Bank of the United States v. Dunseth
Ohio Supreme Court
This is a bill of review from the county of Hamilton. The original case was decided in this court, in 1833 (6 Ohio, 76), when the right of the plaintiff was established, and the case remanded to the Supreme Court of Hamilton county, for the assignment of dower. The decree finally made gave her: I. The sum of $433.81, being the annual value of the estate, since filing her petition. II. The sum of $110 per annum out of the annual rents, issues, and profits. III. Costs.
1Opinion of the CourtLane, C. J.
The right of dower is not now contested, but objections are made to the form of the decree in three points:
1. The right of damages in dower.
At common law, dower was recoverable .in a real action, in which damages made no part of the judgment. The statute of Merton gave damages to the dowress, in certain cases, and since then, until lately, in England, both at law and in chancery, the profits in arrears, from the husband’s death, are given under this name. Such is the law in New York. But as the right of dower *23is inchoate and completed only by assignment, the damages for arrears of rent…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Shirtz v. ShirtzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1836
- Seaton v. JamisonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
3Cited by1 opinion
- Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co. v. FultonOhio Supreme Court · 1899