Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

44 S.C.L. 157

Floyd v. Hodge

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided December 15, 1856

Court of Appeals of South Carolina · decided 1856-12-15

BEFORE GLOVER, J., AT SUMTER, FALL TERM, 1856. The report of Ms Honor, the presiding Judge, is as follows: “ The plaintiffs declared in dower, demanding that Martha •Floyd, late Martha Allbrook and relict of the late Willis Allbrook, be endowed of a tract of land, of which the said Willis Allbrook was seized during the coverture. “ The land was sold by the sheriff, as the property of Willis Allbrook, and purchased by the defendant, who, in bar of demandant’s right of dower,…

Decided 1856-12-15

¶1The opinion of the Court was delivered by

O’Neall, J.

¶2In this case I think the-verdict was perfectly *159right. Por according to tbe proof tbe personal estate was less than tbe debts, and of course there was nothing of it to distribute.

¶3It is no answer to this to say, tbe real estate paid the debts, and that there is a surplus left for distribution.

¶4In Warley vs. Warley, Bail. Eq., 397, tbe rule is very clearly settled, that in an intestacy, personal estate is the primary fund for the payment of debts.

¶5Here therefore the widow cannot have bad a distributive share of that which did not exist. The debts consumed or ought to have consumed the personal estate.

¶6Independent of this conclusive view the jury were told to inquire whether the demandant had elected to take her distributive share of the personal estate, and also whether any fraud bad been practiced upon her. They answered in her favor, on both these inquiries. How are we to say they decided them wrong ?

¶7The motion is dismissed.

Wardlaw, Withers, Whither, G-lover, and Muhro, JJ., concurred.

¶8Motion dismissed.

/44/scl/157 · .json · Public domain