Walsh v. Mathews
Decision Date | 31 October 1847 |
Citation | 11 Mo. 131 |
Parties | WALSH v. MATHEWS AND WIFE. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
ERROR TO ST. LOUIS COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
GAMBLE & BATES, for Plaintiff.
LESLIE, for Defendants.
This was an action of ejectment brought by Mathews & Wife against James B. Walsh in the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas, for real estate in St. Louis county. The case involved the construction of the will of Joseph W. Walsh, deceased, and was submitted to the court upon a special verdict, which found as follows: (After giving some directions in reference to the adjustment of a claim, which the testator had in the Sac and Fox reservation, lying between the Des Moines and Mississippi rivers, the will proceeds), &c. That after decease of said testator and probate of said will as aforesaid, the said Elizabeth Walsh, his widow, took possession of the brick house on Poplar street in the city of St. Louis, and of the farm, both named and described in said will, and thenceforward received the rents and profits of the same, and used and enjoyed the same by virtue of and under the devise to her thereof made in said will. That on January 28, 1845, after the death of said testator, said Elizabeth intermarried with the plaintiff, William Mathews; that immediately after her said marriage with said William Mathews, the said Elizabeth being informed that by the terms of said devise, her said marriage divested her of all estate, right or title, as tenant for life or otherwise, in and to said house on Poplar street, and said farm called “Belair,” described in said will; was induced to give up and surrender to Peter A. Walsh the possession of said house and farm, and that from the date of said surrender by said Elizabeth, said premises have been in the possession of said Peter A. Walsh, or his tenants, and that the rents and profits thereof have not since the date aforesaid been paid to or received by said Elizabeth or on her account or by her order, and that at the time of the commencement of this suit, the said defendant was in possession of said farm, and that the monthly vaiue of said farm is twenty dollars, and that said testator, Joseph W. Walsh, at the date of his said will, and at the time of his decease, was seized in fee of said house on Poplar street and of said farm described in his said will. But whether or not upon the whole matter aforesaid by the jurors aforesaid in form aforesaid found, the said defendant is guilty of the trespass and ejectment within specified, the jurors aforesaid are altogether ignorant, and thereupon pray the advice of the court aforesaid; and if upon the whole matter aforesaid, it shall seem to the said court, that the said defendant is guilty of the trespass and ejectment aforesaid, then the jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths, aforesaid, say that the said defendant is guilty thereof in manner and form as the said plaintiffs have within thereof complaint against him, and in that case they assess the damages of the said plaintiffs on occasion of the trespass and ejectment aforesaid, besides their costs and charges by them about their suit in that behalf expended, to $160; but if upon the whole matter aforesaid, it shall seem to the court that the said defendant is not guilty of the trespass and ejectment aforesaid, upon their oaths...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sullivan v. Garesche
...to this rule found in our reports is in relation to a will by a husband making provision for his widow during her widowhood. [Walsh v. Mathews, 11 Mo. 131; Dumey Schoeffler, 24 Mo. 170.] In the latter case the court referred to Williams v. Cowden and showed how it was distinguished from tha......
-
Knost v. Knost
...being in general restraint of marriage, against public policy, and void, the estate vests in plaintiff free from the condition. Walsh v. Mathews, 11 Mo. 131; Williams v. Cowden, 13 Mo. 211; Dumey Schaefer, 24 Mo. 170; Witherspoon v. Brokau, 85 Mo.App. 169; Bellairs v. Bellairs, 18 L. R. Eq.......
-
Nations v. Spence
... ... [235 S.W. 1067] ... Am. St. Rep. 822; Gaven v. Allen, 100 Mo. 293, 13 S.W. 501; ... Dumey v. Schoeffler, 24 Mo. 170, 69 Am. Dec. 422; Walsh v ... Mathews, 11 Mo. 131 ... The ... point made is that the deed in question expresses a ... consideration, and therefore it ... ...
-
Nations v. Spence
...(N. S.) 1205, 119 Am. St. Rep. 822; Gaven v. Allen, 100 Mo. 293, 13 S. W. 501; Dumey v. Schoeffier, 24 Mo. 170, 30 Ant. Dec. 422; Walsh v. Mathews, 11 Mo. 131. The point made is that the deed in question expresses a consideration, and therefore it was not a gift, i. e., that it is a mere co......