Lamb v. Lamb
| Decision Date | 06 February 1892 |
| Docket Number | 15,511 |
| Parties | Lamb v. Lamb |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
From the Floyd Circuit Court.
Judgment reversed.
C. L Jewett and H. E. Jewett, for appellant.
D. C Anthony, for appellee.
The appellant alleges, in her complaint, that she and the appellee entered into a contract of marriage; that the appellee obtained a controlling influence over her, and secured her confidence; that, well knowing the influence he possessed over her, the appellee falsely represented to her "that, in order to satisfy his grown up sons of the propriety of his marriage to her, and to reconcile them thereto and enable him and her to live in peace after their marriage, it would be necessary for them to execute a paper which would satisfy the defendant's children, but that the paper would not have the effect to deprive her of any of her rights as his wife or as his widow;" that "notwithstanding such paper to be so executed by them she would receive more than twenty-three thousand dollars in stocks, moneys and bonds;" that, "in furtherance of his fraudulent design, the defendant represented to the plaintiff that he would take her to a good lawyer in New Albany, who would act for her and advise her in the matter; that the defendant thereby induced her to go to the office of his own attorney and legal adviser, where, in the presence of the defendant, plaintiff was assured that the paper was all right and as represented by the defendant; that relying upon such representations, and not knowing or understanding the legal effect of the paper, but believing that it was only intended to satisfy defendant's children, and without any intention to relinquish her rights, the plaintiff, in ignorance, not only of the legal effect of such paper, but also of the contents thereof, joined the defendant in the execution, in duplicate, of a written instrument," which reads thus: "This agreement, made this 21st day of August, 1884, between Josiah Lamb of the first part, and Jane Lamb of the second, witnesseth, that, whereas, marriage is intended to be had between the parties, and, whereas, the party of the first part is the owner of large real and personal estate, and to the end that distribution of his said estate may now be settled, so far as the party of the second part is concerned, should he die first: Now, therefore, in consideration of the payment of the sum of one dollar by the party of the first part to the party of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, and of the relinquishment by the party of the second part of all her rights, title and interest in and to the estate, real and personal, of the party of the first part allowed by law, the party of the first part hereby agrees to give and does give to the party of the second part to have and hold as her own separate property, absolutely, out of the estate of the party of the first part, should she survive him, the following personal property." The instrument concludes with a description of the personal property. The complaint, after setting forth the agreement we have copied, avers that the property described in the agreement was of the value of two hundred dollars, and that the value of the appellee's personal estate was more than forty thousand dollars; that the parties married and for a time lived and cohabited as husband and wife. The complaint contains many allegations concerning the appellee's conduct and behavior after marriage, but these we regard as at present immaterial, since the immediate question is whether the antenuptial...
To continue reading
Request your trial