Allen v. Humphrey
New York Supreme Court
The facts disclosed by this case were, that in the year 1844 Betsey Van Allen owned a piece of land, on which was a valid mortgage executed by her grantor, to secure a sura of money •due to a third person.
Read the full summary
The facts disclosed by this case were, that in the year 1844 Betsey Van Allen owned a piece of land, on which was a valid mortgage executed by her grantor, to secure a sura of money •due to a third person. Subsequently, in contemplation of marriage with one Emmons, she entered, into an ante-nuptial contract with him, by which it was agreed that he would refrain from all interference with any property she owned and possessed at the time of the marriage, and that she might always enjoy the same to her sole and separate use, and the rents and profits thereof, and dispose of, and manage the same,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Shankland, J.
This cause must be decided upon the law, as it stood prior to the act of 1848, chapter 200, entitled “ An act for the more effectual protection of the property of married women.” The first section of that act relates to marriages thereafter to be contracted; and although the second section operates on the property of females already married, stiB *557if it is constitutional, as not interfering with the rights of the husband already acquired, it confers no power on the wife to sell and dispose of her estate, as does the third section, as amended by the law of 1849, (c/t.…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Baldwin v. . HumphreyNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Yale v. DedererNew York Supreme Court · 1855