The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-12-21
RECORD OF THE COURTS.
Proceedings in the Various Courts of
Record Yesterday.
Full Abstract of the Opinions Rendered by
the Judges of the Supreme Court
Work in the Local Courts.
Supreme Court-Dec. 10.
Hon. Geo. V. Howk. Chief Justice.


MARRIED WOMAN-PERSoNAL JUDGMENT.
10,833 Margaret H. Scarlett VS.. Isaiah snod-
grass. Onion O. c.
Black, C.-Appellee's complaint alleged that
on Aug. 8, 1881, he purchased certain land at
commissioners sale; that on the same day appel
lants, who were husband and wife, bought the
land OF appellee, agreeing TO make the payments
TO the commissioner and to give their note for
$500 to appellee, payable when the sale should
De confirmed by the court and deed be made;
that in pursuance of the contract appellee as
signed the certificate of purchase to said Mar
garet, ana that in due time deed was made for
the land, but appellants refused TO execute the
note to appellee. Prayer for the recovery of
SAID sum- Appellee had Judgment against Doth
defendants. Held Said Margaret was not per-
sGoally bound by the contract, and as to her the
judemen wac erroneous. C60 Ind, 54S; over
rulee so far 81 in conflict with 70 Ind, 4z4 and
81 i'd, 70) rs to the wife the Judgment is re-
Versed ana affirmed as to the husband.
HUSBAND AND wIFE-LAND HELD IN TRUST FOR
WIFE.
10,990. Daniel Goldsberry, administrator,
vs. Mary A. Gentry ct al. Madison C. G.
Best, C-Where the consideration is paid by
the wife, and the conveyance is taken by the
husband, under verbal agreement, without
fraud. to hold in trust for the wife, valid trust
is created 1873 Ind, 1851 In such case, where
the wife dies first Onethird of the land descends
to the husband twO-thirds to the children, and
upon the death of the husband his third also de-
sends to them, and in proceeding by his adj
minstrator to sell the land for the payment of
debts, to which the children made parties,
| the judgment does not estop them from claiming
| the portion inherited from their mother. al
| Ind, 412) In this case the only proof that the
| land was bought with the wife's money consist
ed in the fact that she claimed that such was the
case and that the land was hers, IN the presence
and hearing of her husband, who made no de NAL
OF the fact. This testimony only raised an infer
ence of the alleged agreement between the hus-
band and wife, which might be repealed by cir
| cumstances, and therefore all the circumstances
attending the holding, including improve
mentS made, were admissible in order
to determine whether the deceased was in fact
holding for hi msef or in trust for his wife. The
court erred in rejecting evidence as to the ma
ture and value of the improve ments made by
| the decedent upon the land. Judgment reversed
MoRTGAGE-wIFEs INTEREsT-RECEIvER.
1O,3OS, Reuben P.INain ct al. VS.. Eliza Ginth-
ert. Harrison c. G.
Niblack, J.-Where wife has joined her hus-
band in the execution of q mortgage on his real
estate to Sc cure debt due from him, and her
inchoate interest in the mnrtga ged lands has be-
come absolute by sale fthe land on Judgments
again at her husband, she is, upon foreclosure of
the mortgage, entitled TO an order that the two
thirds ofthe land, to which she has no claim,
| s hall be first exhausted before resort shall be
had to her third: 90 Ind, 500; rs i'd, 400; 70
| ID, 5679 The fair inference from the facts
averred in appellee's crOss-complaint is that the
mortsaged property, aside from her interest in
it, was insufficient to pay the mortgage debt,
and that her husband had no other properly out
of which the deficiency could be made. This was
equivalent TO an averment that he. was In
solvent and that her property would have
to make up any deficiency. Upon this
showing she was entitled to the
appointment of a receiver to take charge of
and collect the rents of the remaining two-thirds
of the mortgaged property and apply them to the
discharge of the mortgage debt Jdgment az
hrmed.
COAL MINE-FALsE REPRESENTATIONS.
1857. George Arbuckle VS.. Stephen Bieder-
man. VigO G. c.
Bicknen, c. C.-Representations by the lessor
of a coal mine to the effect thar only four acres
of the coal had been mined, and that the water
would have TO be removed from only four acres,
are not mere statements as to value, but repre-
sensations of material exist ng facts upon
which the lessee has right to rely, aud if false,
and known by the lessor to he false, they
will constitute a good of action by the
lessee; (69 Ind, Il 10 i'd, 49, Judgment at
firmed.