Beene's Heirs v. Randall's Heirs
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Chancery Court of Dallas. Heard before the Hon. James B. Clarke. The bill in this case was filed by the plaintiffs in error, who are the heirs at law and personal representatives of Jesse Beene, deceased, against the heirs at law of Willis Randall.
Read the full summary
Error to the Chancery Court of Dallas. Heard before the Hon. James B. Clarke. The bill in this case was filed by the plaintiffs in error, who are the heirs at law and personal representatives of Jesse Beene, deceased, against the heirs at law of Willis Randall. It charges that said Randall, in his life-time, was seized of a certain tract of land; that his heirs at law are Caroline Jones, the wife of William E. Jones, Emeline Holt, the wife of Robert A. Holt, and Edward W. Randall; that in 1829 said Jesse Beene purchased said tract of land from Edmond Randall, the guardian of said Emeline and…
1Opinion of the CourtGoldthwaite, J.
There was no error in the decree of the Chancellor, so far as Holt and wife and Jones and wife are concerned, for the reason that the assent of neither Mrs..Holt nor Mrs. Jones to the sale was established. T.he land .was theirs, and not their husbands’; and it is the policy of ■ the law, that the wife is not to part with her real estate, but by her own consent, freely and voluntarily given. — Clay’s Digest 155 § 27. It is said, however, that in this case the assent of the wife is to *516be presumed; but, if it had been expressly proved, we do not think that would have been enough, for it is the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Berry v. DonleyTexas Supreme Court · 1863
- Smith v. Elliott & DeatsTexas Supreme Court · 1873
- Scheible v. BachoSupreme Court of Alabama · 1868
- Birmingham Nat. Bank v. SteeleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Graham v. GraySupreme Court of Alabama · 1888