Legal Opinion

Doyle v. Rolwing

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided November 19, 1901Published

Appeal from Mississippi Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry G. Riley, Judge. The husband is entitled to curtesy in all lands of which his deceased wife was seized during the coverture, where there were children born alive, as in this case. Curtesy is a marital right, and marital rights are vested rights, and can only be destroyed by the contract, or wrongful act of the person entitled thereto. Leete v. State Bank, 115 Mo. 194; Mitchell v. Violet, 47 S. W. 195; Cooley Const.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Mississippi Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry G. Riley, Judge. The husband is entitled to curtesy in all lands of which his deceased wife was seized during the coverture, where there were children born alive, as in this case. Curtesy is a marital right, and marital rights are vested rights, and can only be destroyed by the contract, or wrongful act of the person entitled thereto. Leete v. State Bank, 115 Mo. 194; Mitchell v. Violet, 47 S. W. 195; Cooley Const. Lim., 442. •A divorce for the fault of the wife does not destroy the husband’s right to curtesy. Our statute, declaring the…

1Opinion of the CourtValliant, J.

This is an action in ejectment. Plaintiff claims an undivided one-twelfth in fee and a life estate as tenant by the curtesy in the rest. His fee in the one-twelfth is conceded, but his claim of estate by the curtesy is disputed.

The facts are these: In 1874 and 1878 plaintiff bought the lands in question, and paid for them with his own means, but took the deeds in his wife’s name as grantee. The titles were fee simple. There were three children born of the marriage capable of inheriting. In Eebruary, 1881, he obtained a decree of divorce for the fault of his wife. After the divorce, the wife,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Wright v. Wright's LesseeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1852
  2. Barber v. RootMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
  3. Starr v. PeaseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1831
  4. Moran v. SomesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
  5. Schuster v. SchusterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API