Hirschman v. Brashears
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 49 — EQUITY APPEAL PROM CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT. I. The will does not prevent any of the devisees from subjecting the estate devised to the payment of any debt they may bind themselves to pay.
Read the full summary
Case 49 — EQUITY APPEAL PROM CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT. I. The will does not prevent any of the devisees from subjecting the estate devised to the payment of any debt they may bind themselves to pay. (Petty V. Malier, 14 B. Mon., 247 ; 5 B. Mon., 327; 7 Bush, 461.) :2. It is against the policy of the law that property shall be given to a person, and that the devisee shall not be able to dispose of it. 'The will makes the property the separate 'estate of Mrs. Brashears, and interdicts its conveyance, by mortgage or otherwise, to pay her husband’s debts. (Griffith v. Griffith, 5 B. Mon., 144;…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Cofer
The intention of the devisor that the land should not be made subject to the husband’s debts is very clear from the will, and this intention would be disregarded if a judgment ■enforcing the appellant’s mortgage was rendered.
*259In our opinion, the will creates in Mrs. Brashears a separate estate; and although she and her husband may have :had power to sell it, or her interest in it, they could not -mortgage it to secure his debt. The statute provides that the separate estate of a married woman may be sold and ■ conveyed by her and her husband, and trustee, if there be ■one, but that no such sale…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Magill v. Mercantile Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1883
- Chenault's Guardian v. Metropolitan Life Ins.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932
- Miller v. SandersCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1896
- Gaither v. GaitherCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1941
- Morrison v. Morrison's AssigneeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1902
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.