Legal Opinion

Hershizer v. Florence

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1883Published

Error to District Court of Madison county. The action was brought to charge the separate estate of the wife with the payment of' two notes, for $200 and $400, respectively, executed by her with her husband, Dec. 18,1867. The petition alleges: “ 1. That prior to and at the time of the execution and delivery of the above described two promissory notes by the said R. Florence and Elizabeth Florence to the said R. B. Adams & Co., to wit, on the 22d day of March, a. d.

Read the full summary

Error to District Court of Madison county. The action was brought to charge the separate estate of the wife with the payment of' two notes, for $200 and $400, respectively, executed by her with her husband, Dec. 18,1867. The petition alleges: “ 1. That prior to and at the time of the execution and delivery of the above described two promissory notes by the said R. Florence and Elizabeth Florence to the said R. B. Adams & Co., to wit, on the 22d day of March, a. d. I860, while the said R. Florence and Elizabeth Florence were husband and wife, the said Elizabeth Florence was seized in 'fee…

1Opinion of the CourtDoyle, J.

1. If the defendant, Elizabeth Florence was, at the date of the execution of the notes, the owner of the real estate described in the petition, or any part of it, as her separate property, the judgment of the district court was wrong. "When a married women, owning a separate estate, executes a *525promissory note, either for herself or as surety for her husband, the presumption is that she charges her separate property with the payment thereof. Such presumption cannot be overcome by testimony by the wife, that such was not her intention. Unless there are circumstances surrounding the transaction…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Noel v. EwingIndiana Supreme Court · 1857
  2. Thurber & Stevenson v. Townsend & WilburNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
  3. Tong v. MarvinMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
  4. Billings v. BakerNew York Supreme Court · 1858
  5. Receivers of the Bank of Circleville v. RenickOhio Supreme Court · 1846

3 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