Bohannon v. Combs

• Decision Date: 18 March 1889
• Citation: 97 Mo. 446,11 S.W. 232
• Parties: BOHANNON et al. v. COMBS et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

11 S.W. 232

97 Mo. 446

BOHANNON et al. v. COMBS et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

March 18, 1889.

DOWER — FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES.

A relinquishment of dower by joining with the husband in a conveyance fails when the conveyance is set aside as fraudulent as to creditors, and the wife's right of dower thereupon revives.

Appeal from circuit court, Pettis county; JOHN P. STROTHER, Judge.

Suit by William E. Bohannon and others against Nancy H. Combs and others. Defendants appeal.

Draffen & Williams and William S. Shirk, for appellants. George P. B. Jackson, for respondents.

SHERWOOD, J.

This is an equitable proceeding, whereby it is sought to set aside as fraudulent certain deeds and a judgment which placed the title to certain land in Pettis county, formerly belonging to William E. Combs, in defendant Pigg, as trustee for Mrs. Combs, and vest it in the plaintiffs, as heirs of their father, Charles E. Bohannon, who had bought the land at execution sale on a judgment against William E. Combs, who was a party defendant when this cause was here before, but who has since died. On a former occasion we held the transactions mentioned as fraudulent, reversed the judgment, and remanded the cause. 79 Mo. 305. On the return to the lower court of this cause it was again heard, and the evidence was the same as before, so far as concerns the main issues in the cause, resulting in a decree in favor of plaintiffs, declaring the deeds, judgments, etc., fraudulent and void as against plaintiffs, etc.; but the lower court also decided that the title of the lands thus decreed to be in plaintiffs be held by them subject to the dower of Nancy H. Combs, widow of the decedent, William E. Combs, and commissioners were appointed, who assigned and set apart the dower interest of said widow in said lands. There was abundant evidence to sustain that portion of the decree which declared the transaction therein mentioned as fraudulent and void; and, though there was evidence of a contrary effect, the decree on that point, coinciding, as it does, with the former adjudication of this court, will not be disturbed, but will be affirmed.

Now, in relation to the residue of the decree. Although there are authorities to the contrary, the better opinion is that when a conveyance of the husband, in which the wife joins, is set aside as being fraudulent as to creditors, this will result in reviving the wife's right of dower, for that, the deed of the husband being void, there is no...