Humphrey v. Phinney
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of dower, for one-third of a messuage, and one hundred acres of land, in Pittstoivn, in Rensselaer county.
Read the full summary
This was an action of dower, for one-third of a messuage, and one hundred acres of land, in Pittstoivn, in Rensselaer county. The defendant pleaded: 1. Neun-, ques accouple, Scc. 2. That the husband was still living, See. with a verification. 3. That David Humphreys, the husband of the demandant, conveyed- the premises for a valuable consideration, to one Caleb Edmunds : that great and valuable improvements have since been made on the premises, to the value of 5,000 dollars, by Edmunds and the defendant in the life time of the husband; and that since his death, the defendant has been, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Kent, Ch. J.
delivered the opinion of the court. The , . demurrer to the third plea admits, that the tenant was, and still is, ready to assign, and set off one third of the premises, in value as they were, at the time of the. Seisin of the husband. The principle assumed by the plea correct, for the widow is not entitled to dower, according to the improved value of the land, in case of alienation by the husband. She must take her dower according to the value at the time of the alienation. This is the rule prescribed in such cases, by the act; (the 29th sess. ch. 168.)* and the statute did not,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Leonard v. SteeleNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- In re BrinkmanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1872