Underhill v. Morgan
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Assumpsit upon the common counts, tried in the superior court (Butler, J.,) upon the general issue closed to the court, with, notice that the defendant would offer evidence that he was not otherwise connected with the matters in suit than as administrator of the estate of Simon Underhill deceased, that the property sued for was a part of said estate, and that his acts in the premises were under the direction of the court of probate, before which the estate was pending for…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit upon the common counts, tried in the superior court (Butler, J.,) upon the general issue closed to the court, with, notice that the defendant would offer evidence that he was not otherwise connected with the matters in suit than as administrator of the estate of Simon Underhill deceased, that the property sued for was a part of said estate, and that his acts in the premises were under the direction of the court of probate, before which the estate was pending for settlement. The court found that the plaintiff was the widow, and the defendant the administrator with., the will annexed,…
1Opinion of the CourtDutton, J.
The law regarding the rights of married women to hold personal property has undergone a great change, both by statute and the decisions of courts, since the case of Dibble v. Hutton, 1 Day, 221. In Baldwin v. Carter, 17 Conn., 201, it was held by this court that an ante-nuptial agreement will be valid after the marriage of the parties, and that if no other trustee is provided the husband will be trustee of such personal property as he has contracted to let her hold to her sole and separate use. In the same case it was decided that, if she should die first, such property would belong to her…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Deming v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1857
- Riley v. RileySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1856
- Jennings v. DavisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1862
- Baldwin v. CarterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1845
- Dibble v. HuttonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1804
3Cited by8 opinions
- Minor v. RogersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1873
- Zeideman v. MolaskyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906
- Lynde v. DavenportSupreme Court of Vermont · 1885
- Husted v. StoneSupreme Court of Vermont · 1896
- Ciezynski v. New Britain Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.