¶1In Ridgway v. McAlpine, at the present term, we decided, that prior the Code, there was no stat-. utory bar, in this State, to a suit for the assignment and recovery of dower; that mere lapse of time short of twenty years, independent of other equitable circumstances, would not authorise a court of equity to treat the claim of dower asserted in such suit as stale; and that there were no circumstances in that case which justified the refusal of relief. Upon the authority of that case, the decree of the chancellor in the case at bar is reversed, and a decree here rendered, declaring that the complainant is entitled to relief against all the respondents; and remanding the cause with directions to the chancellor to proceed to make such further decree and orders as may be necessary to ascertain and to secure to complainant the full measure of relief to which she is entitled. The appellees must pay the costs of the appeal.
32 Ala. 521
Owen v. Campbell
Decided January 15, 1858
Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1858-01-15
<p>1. Dower not barred by statute of limitations, nor by staleness of demand. — The act of 1843, (Clay’s Digest, 329, § 93,) limiting “ all actions for the recovery of lands, tenements, or hereditaments,” to ten years after the accrual of e the cause of action, does not apply to suits for dower ; nor is a court of equity authorized to treat a claim to dower as a stale demand, on account of the mere lapse of time short of twenty years, independent of other equitable circumstances.</p>
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1858-01-15
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently June 1962
3 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →