Hoover v. Samaritan Society
| Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | KENNEDY, J. |
| Citation | Hoover v. Samaritan Society, 4 Whart. 445 (Pa. 1839) |
| Decision Date | 20 April 1839 |
| Parties | HOOVER v. THE SAMARITAN SOCIETY. |
IN ERROR.
1. A power to revoke uses, and to appoint and declare new ones may be executed by one and the same instrument, unless the deed creating the power expressly require that the same should be effected by means of distinct instruments.
2. A married woman having a power of appointment for her separate use and disposal, may execute the same for the benefit of her husband.
3. A deed conveying certain real estate in trust for A., a married woman, contained a proviso declaring that it should be lawful for her notwithstanding coverture, by any deed or deeds to be by her signed and sealed in the presence of two or more witnesses, to revoke all or any of the uses, & c. and to declare new and other uses of the same, as to her might seem proper, and that after the said uses, & c. should be so revoked, & c. it should be lawful for her by any deed or deeds, & c. under her hand and seal attested as aforesaid, to grant, bargain and sell, dispose of and convey the premises to any person or persons, & c. either absolutely, or by mortgage to secure the payment of such sum and sums as she might from time to time borrow for her own separate use and disposal, & c. A., with her husband, by indenture of mortgage, duly signed, sealed and witnessed reciting the power, and that she had borrowed a certain sum of money, for which the husband had given bond, revoked the former uses, and by the same instrument appointed the premises to be held for the use of the mortgagee, & c Held, 1. That the power was well executed in respect to the instrument. 2. That it was not a valid objection to the execution, that the money was borrowed by the husband for his own use, and not for the separate use of A.
ERROR to the District Court for the City and County of Philadelphia.
The Samaritan Beneficial Society of the city of Philadelphia brought a writ of scire facias in the Court below against William Hoover and Barbara his wife, on a mortgage given by the defendants to John Stillé, and assigned to the plaintiffs.
A copy of the mortgage was filed in pursuance of the Act of Assembly, as follows:
The instrument was executed by William Hoover and Barbara Hoover, and acknowledged by both, the certificate of the magistrate setting forth a separate examination of the latter, in the manner required by law, and was duly recorded.
The following affidavit of defence was filed.
" Barbara Hoover, the above named defendant, being duly sworn says, that she is the real party in interest in the above cause, the land sought to be affected being her separate estate, secured to her by marriage settlement, and independent of her said husband, and not liable to his debts and engagements; that she has a just and legal defence against the plaintiff's demand in the above action, the nature and character of which is as follows, to-wit: that by the...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Bonner v. Randal
... ... Chan. Rep. 129; Jamison v ... Jamison, 3 Whart. 457 (1838), Sergeant, J.; Hoover ... v. Samaritan Society, 4 Whart. 445 (1839), Kennedy, ... J.; Sheidle v. Weishlee, 16 Pa. 134 ... ...
-
Bonner v. Randal et Ux.
...security for the debts of her husband: 3 Johns. Chan. Rep. 129; Jamison v. Jamison, 3 Whart. 457 (1838), Sergeant, J.; Hoover v. Samaritan Society, 4 Whart. 445 (1839), Kennedy, J.; Sheidle v. Weishlee, 16 Pa. 134 (1851); Black v. Galway, 24 Pa. 18 (1854), Lewis, J.; Miner v. Graham, 24 Pa.......
-
Alliance Finance Corp. v. Abrams
...reason why she should not subject her estate to a merely contingent liability for the same purpose. When the case of Hoover v. The Samaritan Society, 4 Whart. 445, before this court, the latter argument prevailed, and it was held that a married woman could use a power of appointment to exec......
-
Kuhn v. Ogilvie
... ... liability for the same purpose. When the case of Hoover ... v. The Samaritan Society, 4 Whart. 445, came before this ... court, the latter argument ... ...