Veal's Adm'r v. Veal
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 50 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PROM PAYETTE CIRCUIT COURT. An agreement between husband and wife of such a character as that alleged in this case may ho evidenced by a promissory note in connection with other evidence tending clearly to show it, but the note alone is not sufficient evidence of the alleged agreement.
Read the full summary
Case 50 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PROM PAYETTE CIRCUIT COURT. An agreement between husband and wife of such a character as that alleged in this case may ho evidenced by a promissory note in connection with other evidence tending clearly to show it, but the note alone is not sufficient evidence of the alleged agreement. The case of Maraman v. Maraman, 4 Met., 76, commented on. 1. The note given by the husband to his wife for the proceeds of her estate in lands and slaves created a trust in her favor, and the husband continued to be a trustee for the wife during coverture. (Ward v. Croty, 4…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE HOLT
delivered the opimos op the court.
October 1, 1865, Dora Yeal executed to Ms wife, the appellee, Susan Yeal, Ms promissory note for two thousand two hundred and fourteen dollars and seventy-eight cents, due one day thereafter. The consideration is not recited in the note. It says “for value received of her.” He died testate in 1888. He devised to her what the law gave her merely, and to three of Ms several children the entire remainder of his estate. The will makes no reference to the note. The administrator, cum testamento annexo, brought this action to settle the estate. The…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Maraman's Administrator v. MaramanCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1862
- Latimer v. GlennCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1866
- Matson v. MatsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1863
3Cited by1 opinion
- San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway Co. v. BlairTexas Supreme Court · 1917