The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-10-09
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
The Court Adjourns at staunton ." Meet
Here November t2th.

STAUNTON, VA, oct. S.-Specldi.--ihe
following opinions were han led down IN
the Court OF Appeals to-day:
Bumgardners Trustee VS.. M,~ue's c. "a
itors opinion by Judge lanes keith,
president. From the Circuit Court OF
Augusta county. Reversed in part.
This Is a sequel TO McCue's trustee VS..
Harris and others, reported IN - va.
When the case went back TO The EirCat
Court. certain creditors of McCue MED
their petition attacking for ao,cai i'avd
a deed Of marriage settlement mate by
McCue. in consideration of marriage. In
May. 1851 The deed conveyed all nis
property for the benefit Of certain c. ed
itors then for the benefit OF his wife
and any issue of the marriage, and in
the event that his wife should die with
out issue, TO him for life, with remainder
to his sister and her Children.
Held: That marriage is a vaiuanis
consideration, sufficient to support the
settlement upon the intended wife and
children: that insofar as II undertook
TO convey the property for the benent
OF himself. his sister, and his CHILDREN
IL was void as 10 his creditors. beng
fraudulent in fact There is 10 period
OF limitation prescribed 70 an attack
upon a conveyance for actual fraud. and
the LAPSE OF time IN this ease Is salts
factorily and sufficiently accounted Tor.
and the creditors are entitled to recover.
Stanton T., Is. Il l.. co. VS.. west
Clifton Forge Investment Co. opinion
by Judge Keith. president From the
Circuit Court of Allegheny county. Al
iirmed.
The Court decides that where SUIT
at law was brought in the Hastings court
of the city OF stanton against the de-
fendant resident therein, a corporation
resident in the county OF Allegheny. That
process served in Allegheny county 10
answer the pIaintins suit in stanton
must be served ten days before the re
turn thereof This being Judgment by
default the process can be looked at
and IL disclosing the fact that the re-
turn was not in conformity 10 the stat
ute the Hastings Court acquired no Jnris'
diction. The Circuit Court OF Alleghany
county having held that the Judgment
thus obtained was a nulllty, ana open
10 collateral attack. its decree Is al
iirmed
Harris. administrator. VS.. c. ana o.
Railroad Company. Opinion by Judge
John W. Rely. From the Circuit Court
OF Nelson county. Affirmed.
Emma A. Miller. by. &C. vs.. Vivian
T. Miller. opinion by Judge H. II.
Cardwell. From the Circuit Court OF
Warren county. Affirmed.
Where a bill for divorce mensa 81
thoro. on the ground of cruelty and
abandonment, is at the hearing on the
bill and answer dismissed for the want
OF proof 70 sustain the charges In the
| hill. a plea of res adjudcata TO a sec
| ond bill for divorce vinculo matrlmonh
on the grounds of cruelty abandonment
and adultery, set up by DEFENDANT an
| swer. and supported By an EXHIBIT there-
with OF the record in the former SUIT, II
a good plea as 10 the charges IN tht
first suit and was properly sustained
| and the charge Of adultery IN the secohu
| hill being vague. indefinite, ana iaiiiile
10 give to defendant SUFFICIENT nouce VI
the charge that he is 10 meet, the ue"lu'
rer thereto was properly sustained as "
| this charge, and the bill properly dls
| missed. -
Hulvey VS.. Hulvey. Opinion by Judge
John A. Buchanan. From the Circuit
Court OF Rockingham county ne
| versed.
The widow of q decedent. who remains
in possession OF land with one or ms
heirs. holds in privty with ms othT'
heirs and cannot set up adverse u'l'
acquired while in such possession. Nltnou
showing a clear, positive. and continued
! disclaimer. Il disavowal Of the tue, aii'
an assertion OF an adverse right brouBh
! home to the adverse claimant. In su''
a case the statute OF limitations docs
not begin to run until this possession
| before consistent with the title OF 'h'
| adverse claimant, becomes t0ruous am
/ wrongful by the dsloyai acts OF 'h'
! Marty in possession, which must ne .
| omen notorious. and continued as VII
| futlv and clearly show the changed char
acter of his possession. and knoNieuSe
! such change on the part OF the adverse
claimant. go,
The taking and registering OF dee'
bv which such adverse title IS acquire
bv the widow whilst In possession II
| urtvitv with the heirs, cannot ahect 'h'
rights of the latter until they nave &C
tual notice thereof. as no one Is reluire'
~ watch the clerks office TO see ina
| those in possession of property IN Pr
vity with him, or In subordination 10 ~
| ole are net acquiring rights adverse u
| him. . .
Houcks administrator vs.. Dunham q
| Nerfoot. Opinion by Judge George NJ
! Harrison. From the Circuit court
Rockingham county. Affirmed
The court delivers the above opinions
and adjourns TO meet in Richmond NO
| vsmber y. 1895.
! -r Ny RI.