Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Gordon v. Eans

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided October 15, 1888Published

Appeal from Cole Circuit Court. — Trial before Hon. Noah M. Givan,. Judge of the Seventh. Judicial Circuit. (1) Separate money of the wife paid to the husband or placed to his account by her authority or with her concurrence cannot be recalled by her. Smith’s Equity (Am.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Cole Circuit Court. — Trial before Hon. Noah M. Givan,. Judge of the Seventh. Judicial Circuit. (1) Separate money of the wife paid to the husband or placed to his account by her authority or with her concurrence cannot be recalled by her. Smith’s Equity (Am. Ed.) sec. 855 ; Catón v. Rideout, 1 M. & G. 599 ; Gardner v. Gardner, 1 Gift'. 126; Ridout v. Lewis, 1 Atk. 266 ; Jacobs v. Hester, 118 Mass. 157; Shirley v. Shirley, 9 Paige, 363 ; Edelin v. Edelin, 11 Md. 415 ; Grover v. Radcliff, 53 Md. 496 ; Courtwright v. Court-wright, 53 la. 57 ; McGlinsey v. McGlinsey, 14 S. & R. (Pa.)…

1Concurrence

SEPARATE OPINION.

Barclay, J.

To explain my concurrence in the result announced, it may be proper to add that, since this proceeding was begun in the probate court, the section of the administration law on which it rests has been amended. It now reads as follows: “Sec. 75, If the executor or administrator, or other person interested in any estate file an affidavit in the proper court, stating that the affiant has good cause to believe, and does believe, that any person has concealed or embezzled, or is otherwise wrongfully. withholdiny any goods, chattels, moneys, books, papers or evidences of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Tippack v. BriantSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API