Prescott v. Snell, 5656
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Idaho |
| Writing for the Court | GIVENS, J. |
| Citation | 299 P. 1079,50 Idaho 644 |
| Parties | ELLEN E. PRESCOTT, Appellant, v. ED. SNELL, LUCY SNELL, EMMA SNELL PEDERSON and JULIA RUSKY, Respondents |
| Docket Number | 5656 |
| Decision Date | 14 May 1931 |
299 P. 1079
50 Idaho 644
ELLEN E. PRESCOTT, Appellant,
v.
ED. SNELL, LUCY SNELL, EMMA SNELL PEDERSON and JULIA RUSKY, Respondents
No. 5656
Supreme Court of Idaho
May 14, 1931
HUSBAND AND WIFE-COMMUNITY PROPERTY-GIFTS FROM HUSBAND TO WIFE-PROPERTY ACQUIRED DURING COVERTURE-PRESUMPTION.
1. That husband deals with wife's property is not sufficient alone to show that it was community property.
2. In action to quiet title, burden was on wife to prove that realty levied on as community property under judgment against husband was wife's separate property.
3. Property may be conveyed from husband to wife as gift if no rights of creditors are at time involved.
[50 Idaho 645]
4. All property acquired by wife during coverture is presumed to be community property.
5. In action to quiet title, reconciliation and determination of facts held for trial court.
6. In wife's action to quiet title to realty against purchasers at execution sale on judgment against husband levied on realty as community property, finding that realty was community property held supported.
APPEAL from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, for Canyon County. Hon. Ed. L. Bryan, Judge.
Action to quiet title. Judgment for defendants. Affirmed.
Judgment affirmed. Costs to respondents. Petition for rehearing denied.
Rhodes & Estabrook, for Appellant.
It is the settled law of this state that a husband may when free from debts make a gift to his wife of any or all of his separate property or his interest in the common property. ( Bank of Orofino v. Wellman, 26 Idaho 425, 143 P. 1169; Sassaman v. Root, 37 Idaho 588, 218 P. 374; McMillan v. McMillan, 42 Idaho 270, 245 P. 98.)
The fact that the husband may have conducted the business of farming the ranch, or assumed some authority over it, does not destroy its separate character. (In re Nelson's Estate, 104 Cal.App. 613, 286 P. 439; Chicago Portrait Co. v. Sexton, 49 Idaho 128, 286 P. 615; Wilkerson v. Aven, 26 Idaho 559, 144 P. 1105.)
S. Ben Dunlap, for Respondents.
This court has held in a long list of cases that all property acquired by either spouse during coverture is presumed to be community property, and that the burden of proof rests upon the party who asserts it to be separate property to show such fact by a preponderance of the evidence. (Clifford v. Lake, 33 Idaho 77, 190 P. 714; Chaney v. Gauld & Co., 28 Idaho 76, 152 P. 468; Vaughan v. Hollingsworth, 35 Idaho 722, 208 P. 838.)
Where the presumption exists that property is community the wife cannot overcome such presumption by mere naked statements...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Aker v. Aker, 5896
...Co., 37 Idaho 787, 219 P. 200; McMillan v. United States Fire Ins. Co., 48 Idaho 163, 280 P. [52 Idaho 719] 220; Prescott v. Snell, 50 Idaho 644, 299 P. 1079; Snell v. Stickler, 50 Idaho 648, 299 P. 1080.) It was proper in the divorce action to determine the property rights involved herein.......
-
Reed v. Gallet, 5728
...been paid for his expenses in getting to and returning from the regular session of the twenty-first legislature and not having incurred [50 Idaho 644] any travel expense in attending the extraordinary session, convening the day after adjournment of the regular session, it follows that the l......
-
Hobbs v. Hobbs, 7444
...P. 1012; Boise Ass'n of Credit Men v. Glenns Ferry Meat Co., 48 Idaho 600, at page 605, 283 P. 1038 and cases cited; Prescott v. Snell, 50 Idaho 644, [204 P.2d 1036] 299 P. 1079; Section 31-907, I.C.A., as amended, 1943 Session Laws, Chapter 23, p. 51. No creditors are involved herein. Whet......
-
Aker v. Aker, 5896
...Co., 37 Idaho 787, 219 P. 200; McMillan v. United States Fire Ins. Co., 48 Idaho 163, 280 P. [52 Idaho 719] 220; Prescott v. Snell, 50 Idaho 644, 299 P. 1079; Snell v. Stickler, 50 Idaho 648, 299 P. 1080.) It was proper in the divorce action to determine the property rights involved herein.......
-
Reed v. Gallet, 5728
...been paid for his expenses in getting to and returning from the regular session of the twenty-first legislature and not having incurred [50 Idaho 644] any travel expense in attending the extraordinary session, convening the day after adjournment of the regular session, it follows that the l......
-
Hobbs v. Hobbs, 7444
...P. 1012; Boise Ass'n of Credit Men v. Glenns Ferry Meat Co., 48 Idaho 600, at page 605, 283 P. 1038 and cases cited; Prescott v. Snell, 50 Idaho 644, [204 P.2d 1036] 299 P. 1079; Section 31-907, I.C.A., as amended, 1943 Session Laws, Chapter 23, p. 51. No creditors are involved herein. Whet......