Legal Opinion

Fitch v. Ayer

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 15, 1817PublishedCited by 8 opinions

THIS was a bill in chancery. The case was as follows. In April, 1798, John Clark made his will, containing, among other things, the following bequest : “ I gi ve to my loving daughter, Thisbe Fitch, two hundred pounds lawful money, to be paid her, by my son Elijah Clark, in manner following, vi». the interest thereof to be paid her annually from and after my decease, yearly, and every year, during the time of iter coverture or marriage ; and the principal sum of two hundred…

Read the full summary

THIS was a bill in chancery. The case was as follows. In April, 1798, John Clark made his will, containing, among other things, the following bequest : “ I gi ve to my loving daughter, Thisbe Fitch, two hundred pounds lawful money, to be paid her, by my son Elijah Clark, in manner following, vi». the interest thereof to be paid her annually from and after my decease, yearly, and every year, during the time of iter coverture or marriage ; and the principal sum of two hundred pounds to be paid her, whenever she shall become single, orto her heirs after her decease.” He appointed his son, Elijah…

1Opinion of the Court

Swift, Ch. J.

In this case there is no necessity of considering the question whether a married woman can have a separate estate ; or whether we will adopt the English law7 on that subject; for upon the principles of that law, the legacy in question docs not create a separate estate in the v/ife. By the will, the interest of 2001. is to be paid to the wsfe annually, during coverture. There is no decision in England⅜ which will shew that this legacy constitutes a separate estate in the wife. It is, in effect, and by law7, a gift to the husband himself ; and a legacy in this form has always been…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Deming v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1857
  2. Sims v. RicketsIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
  3. Whittlesey v. McMahonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1834
  4. Cornwall v. HoytSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1829
  5. Morgan v. Thames BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1840

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