Tinsley v. Roll
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
CASE 39 — PETITION EQUITY — APPEAL FROM MUHLENBURG CIRCUIT COURT. cited 12 B. Mon., 329; 14 lb., 247. cited Clancy on Husband and Wife, p. 262; 14 B. Mon., 145; lb., 247; Rev. Stat., 395, sec. 17. cited 17 B. Mon., 113. cited 17 B. Mon., Ill; 3 Bibb, 244; 3 B. Mon., 277 ; 5 lb., 117 ; 8 Yerger, 33 ; 3 Gill $ Johns., 504; 4 Desau., 458; 2 Brights Husband and Wife, 210, 214; 4 Dana, 610 ; 7 Vin. Ab., 95; 3 Atk., 399 ; 3 Br.
Read the full summary
CASE 39 — PETITION EQUITY — APPEAL FROM MUHLENBURG CIRCUIT COURT. cited 12 B. Mon., 329; 14 lb., 247. cited Clancy on Husband and Wife, p. 262; 14 B. Mon., 145; lb., 247; Rev. Stat., 395, sec. 17. cited 17 B. Mon., 113. cited 17 B. Mon., Ill; 3 Bibb, 244; 3 B. Mon., 277 ; 5 lb., 117 ; 8 Yerger, 33 ; 3 Gill $ Johns., 504; 4 Desau., 458; 2 Brights Husband and Wife, 210, 214; 4 Dana, 610 ; 7 Vin. Ab., 95; 3 Atk., 399 ; 3 Br. C. C., 381; 5 Vesey, 540; 2 Cox Rep., 414; 1 Dana, 92; 7 Dana, 166; 2 B. Mon., 279,280.
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Simpson
Although, as heretofore decided, a separate estate in a married woman may be created by a parol gift, where the title to the property will pass without a transfer or conveyance in writing, yet such a gift cannot be sustained unless it be clearly and distinctly proved that it was made for the sole and separate use of the wife, to the exclusion of the rights of the husband.
Declarations made by the husband that a slave belongs to his wife, when the gift was made previous to the passage of the act of 1846, do not even tend to prove that the wife has a separate estate in the slave. Such…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Shackleford v. CollierCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1869
- Brown v. GordonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1854
- Walton v. BroaddusCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1869