Bennett's Adm'r v. Bennett

36 Ala. 571
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided June 15, 1860·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinions

STONE, J.

The case of Sessions v. Sessions, 33 Ala. 522, was decided on, the basis, that the money sought to be recovered was the separate estate of Mrs. Sessions, under our statutes to secure to married women their separate estates. In that case, we held, that a bill in chancery would not lie against the administrator of a deceased husband, for money — the corpus of the separate estate — which the latter had received in his life-time, and had not accounted for. — See, also, Jenkins v. McConico, 26 Ala. 213.

The present case is, in principle, precisely the same as Sessions v. Sessions, and under its authority, the decree of the chancellor is reversed ; and this court, proceeding to render such decree as the chancellor should have rendered, doth hereby order and decree, that the bill of com-i plainant be dismissed, at her cost, both in the court below and in this court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bennett's Adm'r v. Bennett, 36 Ala. 571 (Ala. 1860).

36 Ala. 571 (Bennett's Adm'r v. Bennett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State ex rel. Bisbee v. Drew
17 Fla. 67 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1879)
Hays v. Cockrell
41 Ala. 75 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1867)
Jean v. Sandiford
39 Ala. 317 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1864)