Yake v. Pugh
| Decision Date | 18 November 1895 |
| Citation | 13 Wash. 78,42 P. 528 |
| Parties | YAKE v. PUGH ET AL. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Appeal from superior court, Spokane county; Wallace Mount, Judge.
Action by Jennie Yake against F. McK. Pugh and others to recover personal property. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Griffitts & Nuzum, for appellants.
A. M S. Hilgard, for respondent.
This action was brought to recover possession of certain personal property, and damages for its detention. From defendants' answer it appeared that their claim was founded upon a levy under attachment in a suit against the plaintiff and her husband. The plaintiff's right to possession is founded upon her claim that the property belonged to her; that of the defendants upon the claim that it was community property. And the question presented by these adverse claims is the principal one which we are called upon to decide.
There is a further claim that error was committed by the trial court in refusing to strike the testimony offered by the plaintiff to show that she had been damaged by the detention of the property. This motion was aimed at all of the testimony upon that subject. Some of it was clearly competent. The motion was therefore properly denied. There was enough competent testimony upon the question of damages to require its submission to the jury, and, as no exceptions were taken to the manner in which it was submitted, no claim of error can be sustained growing out of the court's action in that regard.
It appeared from the testimony that the property had been acquired by the wife with money which she had received from persons whom she had kept as boarders, and for work done by her as a dressmaker. It also appeared that, before she consented to engage in the business by means of which this money was obtained, her husband told her that, if she did so whatever money she made should be her separate property; and to further establish the fact that as between the husband and wife it was understood to be the business of the wife, and not of the community, it was shown that the husband paid the wife for his board the same as did other boarders. That the earnings of the wife, as well as those of the husband, when they are living together, prima facie belong to the community, has been held to be the law in most, if not all, of the states which have statutes similar to our own. This rule was recognized and applied to the statutes of this state in the case of Abbott v. Wetherby, 6 Wash 507, 33 P. 1070. Under it, if the wife had done what she did without any agreement between herself and her husband as to who should have the benefit of her services, the money received therefor would have been that of the community. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Togliatti v. Robertson
... ... into an agreement that thereafter the earnings of each shall ... be the separate property of each. Yake v. Pugh, 13 ... Wash. 78, 42 P. 528, 52 Am.St.Rep. 17; Dobbins v. Dexter ... Horton & Co., 62 Wash. 423, 113 P. 1088; Union ... ...
-
W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. McLeod
... ... cases, as I understand them, have heretofore been in favor of ... the foregoing principle. In the somewhat early case of ... Yake v. Pugh, 13 Wash. 78, 42 P. 528, 52 Am. St ... Rep. 17, it appeared that the husband and [151 Wash. 230] ... wife entered into an oral ... ...
-
Harber's Estate, In re, 8572
...are valid. Gage v. Gage, 78 Wash. 262, 138 P. 886; Dobbins v. Dexter Horton & Co., 62 Wash. 423, 113 P. 1088; Yake v. Pugh, 13 Wash. 78, 42 P. 528, 52 Am.St.Rep. 17.' 160 P. at We adopt the proposition that marital partners may in Arizona validly divide their property presently and prospect......
-
Myers v. Walker
... ... We think the question ... of the character of the property--separate or community--was ... for the jury. Yake v. Pugh, 13 Wash. 78, 42 P. 528, ... 52 Am. St. Rep. 17; Dobbins v. Dexter Horton & Co., ... 62 Wash. 423, 113 P. 1088; Gage v. Gage, 78 ... ...
-
§3.2 Particular Assets
...11, 176 P.2d 335 (1947); Jones v. Duke, 151 Wash. 108, 275 P. 72 (1929); Plath v. Mullins, 87 Wash. 403, 151 P. 811 (1915); Yake v. Pugh, 13 Wash. 78, 42 P. 528 (1895); Abbott, 6 Wash. A wifes earnings while married and living with her husband are treated the same way as the husbands earnin......
-
Table of Cases
...In reMarriage of, 147 Wn.2d 184, 52 P.3d 512 (2002): 5.6(6) Wyman v. Wallace,94 Wn.2d 99, 615 P.2d 452 (1980): 3.2(15) Y Yake v. Pugh, 13 Wash. 78, 42 P. 528 (1895): 3.2(1) Yakima PlumbingSupply Co. v. Johnson, 149 Wash. 257, 270 P.2d 829 (1928): 6.2(1), 6.2(4) Yates, In reMarriage of, 17 W......
-
Chapter I. Community Property Agreements
...315 This rule should be distinguished from rules for other, nonstatutory agreements that are valid even if oral. See, e.g., Yake v. Pugh, 13 Wash. 78, 42 P. 528 316 Private seals have been abolished under RCW 64.04.090. 317 Simultaneous deeds of community property to be delivered to the sur......
-
Table of Cases
...(2008), review denied, 166 Wn.2d 1005 (2009): 211 Y _____________________________________________________________________ Yake v. Pugh, 13 Wash. 78, 42 P. 528 (1895): 335 Yates v. Taylor, 58 Wn. App. 187, 791 P.2d 924, review denied, 115 Wn.2d 1017 (1990): 289, 302-03 Yiatchos' Estate, In r......