Case ID: tenn_27/html/0537-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Turley, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lewis et. ux. vs. James et. als.
    
    X. The widow is entitled to dower in the equitable estates of her husband and to discharge the encumbrances on such estates with the personalty.
    2. Where real estate was sold at chancery sale, and the purchaser believing that he had acquired a good title, placed valuable improvements on it for the manufacture of iron, and it appearing on bill filed, that the estate was subject to dower^it is held by the court, that in as much as it would be inequitable for the complainant to be benefited by the improvements at the expense of defendant, or for her to be admitted to a partnership in the manufactory, that it would be proper and the court had the power to decree an annual payment of money to the complainant in lieu of dower, equivalent to the annual value of her interest in the estate.
    Jesse A. Brunson, William B. Bartee and C. M. Shelby, were partners in 1835, in the Byrn Forge Iron Works. In June 1836, Shelby sold his interest to Brunson and Bartee. On the 6th day of January 1837, Bartee conveyed his moiety, together with four negroes, to one James H. Bingham as trustee, to secure a debt of $3000 to Shelby; due 1st January 1839. In 1837, Brunson died, and his moiety of the forge was sold under order of court, and Louisa L. Brunson his widow became the purchaser. On the 19th June 1837, the said Louisa L., resold said moiety to Bartee for the consideration of $12000, and the payment by Bartee of the partnership debts; and on the same day, Bartee conveyed to Shelby as trustee the said moiety interest so purchased, and sundry negroes, including the four negroes embraced in the deed to Bingham,*to secure the payment of the $12,000 and the partnership debts. Bartee died in March 1838, leaving the complainant Elizabeth G., his widow, (and three children him surviving,) who subsequently intermarried with complainant James M. Lewis. Robert Tompkins qualified as administrator of said Bartee, and as such suggested the insolvency of his estate. At the July term, 1838, of the circuit court at Dover, a petition was filed in the names of the children and personal representative of said Bartee, in which petition the trustees and beneficiaries in the two deeds mentioned also joined, praying a sale of the said forge and works as manifestly for the interest of all concerned. Upon this petition a sale was had, and Louisa L. Brunson became, the purchaser for the sum of $5687. -This sale was confirmed at the.March term, L339, of said court, and the purchaser executed her notes for the purchase money. No final disposition has been made of this fund.
    Shortly after this sale the forge and premises attached were sold to the defendant James L. James by Mrs. Brunson for $6000, and thereupon he took possession of the same and has remained in possession ever since, having made large and valuable improvements. In the meantime, Mrs. Brunson intermarried with Tompkins, the administrator of Bartee, having first purchased and taken an assignment of Shelby’s debt of $3000, and trust deed made to secure the same. In the meantime also, as the instalments of the $12,000 purchase, and the partnership debts agreed to be paid by Bartee, respectively fell due, Shelby sold the negroes in the deed to him as trustee, including the four negroes embraced in the deed to Binghám, and paid the proceeds in satisfaction of the debts secured in said deed. The four negroes mentioned sold for more than sufficient to satisfy the $3000 secured by the deed to Bingham, but the proceeds were paid to Mrs. Brunson on the $12,000. The lands and negroes conveyed by the several deeds brought $18,040. The debts secured to be paid amounted to $10,013. This bill was filed on the 23d October. 1843, by James L. Lewis and wife Elizabeth, to obtain dower in the moiety of the Byrn Forge and works conveyed to Bing-ham as trustee to secure the $3000 due to Shelby. The cause came on for final hearing on the 29th April 1847, at the chancery court at Clarksville, before the Hon. Terry H. Cahal, ^chancellor, who decreed in favor of complainant. The decree after reciting the facts as hereintofore detailed, proceeds thus:
    “And the court being of opinion, that the widow’s right tq dower in the equitable estates in said forge and lands,' attached on the death of her-husband the said Bartee, and that the money arriving from the sale of the four negroes conveyed to said Bingham ought to be applied to the discharge of Shelby’s debt, and that Mrs. Louisa L. Brunson, now Mrs. Tompkins, cannot force Shelby to a satisfaction of his debt out of the moiety of the forge and lands, to let her into the benefit of the proceeds of the four negroes, to the defeat of the widow of her dower; and the court being likewise of opinion, that the sale of the forge and lands, by decree of the circuit court of Stewart county, and purchase thereof by Mrs. Brunson, and sale by her to defendant James, cannot deprive the widow of her dower in said forge and lands, so far as incumbrance were removed by the personalty conveyed by said deed of trust; and it appéaring to the court that the incumbrances upon the moiety conveyed to Bingham for Shelby’s benefit, was wholly removed and discharged, and complainant declining any account as to the other moiety, the court doth order and decree that complainants are entitled to have dower in one moiety of said forge and lands. And it is therefore ordered, that ----be commissioners to allot and assign said dower, and that when assigned the complainant be let into the possession and enjoyment thereof by said James. It is further decreed that complainants are entitled to one sixth of the rents of said forge and lands' from the death of said William B. Bartee. It is therefore ordered, that the clerk and master of this court, take an account of the rents with said James from the time he took possession with annual interest, and of the improvements and meliorations; should the improvements exceed the rents and profits, set off the rents and profits so far as they go; should the rents and profits exceed the improvements state the balance of rents, and make report to the next term of this court.”
    
      T. Washington, G. A. Henry and E. H. Foster Jr. for complainants.
    
      F. B. Fogg, Shackelford and Bailey, for defendants.
   Turley, J.

delivered the opinion of the court.

In this case we are satisfied, that the complainant is entitled to dower, in one half of the premises in the pleadings mentioned, that is, one sixth of the whole and affirm the decree of the chancellor thus far.

But inasmuch as the defendant is an honest purchaser of the premises, and in good faith, believed that he had acquired the same free from any claim for dower, on the part of the complainant, and has since, put valuable improvements, by additions to the Iron Works erected upon the land previous to his purchase, both in machinery and other things,, to the amount of several thousand dollars, whereby the annual value thereof, has been greatly increased, and that, since the complainant’s right to dower has accrued; and it appearing to us, that it is inequitable to allow her, to be benefitted.out of the defendant’s expenditures, without paying her portion thereof, and that to do this, may be impossible for her: and it being impossible so to allot her dower, with fairness to herself without letting her into an enjoyment of a part of the works, which cannot be done by mailing her a tenant in common.to the extent of her interest, with the defendant, without making her his co-partner to that extent, which justice to him will not permit on the account of his individual outlay for the improvement of the property.

We therefore direct, that the clerk and master take an account, showing what was the annual value ofthe property at the time the complainant’s right of dower accrued; and what it was when the defendant took possession under. his purchase from Mrs. Brunson, and from that time, we decree against the defendant, the one sixth part thereof annually with interest up to the time of this decree, for which judgment will be given against him in favor of the complainant. And from this time forward, we decree that she be allowed annually, the one sixth part of the same valuation during her life, as her dower, and that the same be charged upon the estate. And if at any time hereafter, said works should cease to secure to her the amount from any cause whatever, that that she may then have her interest of one sixth part of the whole tenement laid off to her by metes and bounds, and be let into possession of the same.