Gainus v. Cannon
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Lonoke Circuit Court, in Chancery. Hon. J. W. MartiN, Circuit Judge. 1. Our statute and Constitution for 1874, creating and defining the homestead right, does not limit and restrict the uses to which the homestead may be applied.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Lonoke Circuit Court, in Chancery. Hon. J. W. MartiN, Circuit Judge. 1. Our statute and Constitution for 1874, creating and defining the homestead right, does not limit and restrict the uses to which the homestead may be applied. Thompson on Homesteads and Ex., secs. 135-6-7-8-9; 37 Ark., 383 and 398. 2. The husband never reduced the wife’s money to possession — he was only the custodian and agent of the wife, upon the express condition that it was to be invested in a homestead for her. He was a trustee, and a trust attached to the property purchased with her money. As to the…
1Opinion of the Court
EakíN, J.
J. J. Gainus and Ms wife, Sarah A., were married in Mississippi, and for some time were residents of that State. They removed to this State, and J. J. Gainus died.
Many years ago, Ms wife was entitled to, and received as distributee of her father’s estate, the sum of $900 in gold, which -went into the hands of her husband. "When the money was paid to her is not shown. Iier father died about twenty years before the commencement of this suit, and we infer the distributive share was paid before the passage of the act of April 28, 1875, or the Constitution of 1868.
After the parties came…
2Cited by27 opinions
- Smith v. Guckenheimer & SonsSupreme Court of Florida · 1900
- Simpson v. BiffleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1896
- Smith v. Webb (In Re Webb)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1990
- Leslie v. BellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
- Bebb v. CroweSupreme Court of Kansas · 1888
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.