¶1It is settled by former decisions, which we are unwilling to disturb, that a married woman can not, directly or indirectly, whether by mortgage or absolute deed, convey her statutory separate estate as a security for, or in consideration of the debt of her husband.' — Weil v. Pope, 53 Ala. 585; Williams v. Bass, 57 Ala. 487. These authorities also indicate that, at her instance', a court of equity will intervene, and rescind a conveyance founded upon such consideration, though there may not be fraud or duress, and no averment or evidence of improvidence in the transaction. There was, consequently, error in sustaining the motion to dismiss the bill for want of equity. Let the decree be reversed, and the cause remanded.
64 Ala. 564
Boyleston v. Farrior
Decided December 15, 1879
Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1879-12-15
Heard before the Hon. N. S. Graham. The bill in this case was filed on the 8th January, 1878, by Mrs. Victoria Boyleston, the wife of Joseph C. Boyleston, against William'M. Farrior, D. W. McRee, and her said husband ; and sought, principally, the cancellation of a deed, by which her husband conveyed to said Farrior atract of land, which the complainant claimed under a deed of gift from her father, Franklin Auglin, as belonging to her statutory separate estate.
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently December 1888
6 state decisions
Relies on Weil & Brother v. Pope · Williams, Birnie & Co. v. Bass
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1879-12-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →