The Washington times., 1902-03-19
Justice Hagner Announces
0~ an important De-
CiSiOn.
PAULINE KREUTER UPHELD
Debts Of Husband, Who Died Without
Personal Property, Cannot Be Collected
s From Widows Share of Realty Held
in Trust-The Opinion in Full.

Justice Eaener recently announced an
important decision relative TO dover
rights The matter came on for consid-
Grafton in connection with the settlement
of the suit of AUgvst Kreuter against
Pauline Kreuter AMI others, which has
been pending in the local courts since
1886. In he final decision in this case he
decided that a widows dover right is
not subject to a claim or judgment Sc
curcd against the widow.
The facts of this case are that the pc
titioner. August Kreuter. filed an origi-
nal bill against certain defendants.
p among whom was Mary V. Kreuter, the
widow of a brother. and who WIS entitled
to a dover right of the property of which
her husband died possessed. That a juds-
ment creditor Of the widow intervened
snd PRAYED that the court direct the pay
ment of his judgment cut of the fund in
The court belonging to the widow. Justice
Hagner. in rendering the opinion. sar:
I'm this case the creditor filed a bill
. against the widow and some infants. al
leging that the husband died possessed of
some lard, that he owed the creditor 4
a, sum of money. and that he left no per
soHal estate. The creditors wanted the
land sold, and the widow said that she
was willing 10 have it sold, and to have
her dover assigned to her. Therefore a
decree was signed by Mr.. Justice Cox in
1897, allowing the trustees to cucumber
the property. They had power, among
other things, to sell the property and
Irip of. .I.,r into
and dispose CT it under the direction of
the court, and the title to the property
was vested in the trustees for the pur-
- pose CT making the loan. Then the trus-
tees got the money, executed a deed Of
trust and when the said trust was not
paid the trustees, under the deed of trust.
sold the property. Then began these vari
Gus accounts. The intervenor who filed
the petition is the owner of a judgment
obtained by the judgmen. creditor, Ben
ja-nin K. Neal. against the widow. AS
to the real controversy in the case. il
thas been insisted, under authorities that
have been referred to. that the court
should seize the property and apply il to
the discharge Of this judgment. / do not
think SO. In the New York cases cited.
il was held that the widow has fraudu-
lently and wrorgfully refused to allow
the dover to be assigned to her. in order
to keep her personal creditors from get
g ting the money. But the case at bar is
different, for at common law you could
o. not seize chose in action. II was right
to something. ard you could no more sell
IL. than you could sell an option upon
piece of land The widows rights while
- nnadjusted are just of that character,
and not subject of execution. Can you
come into equity and do this? Equty's
function is not to collect debts. II there
was fraud they will Put their hands upon
st and prevent it. This is an exceptional
case. do not consider that 1t is the Law
that from the mere fact that a creditor
comes in and says he cannot collect his
DEBT that this right is to be seized in this
way. ! cannot see any way in which 1t
can be dcne."
Messrs. l. A. Bailey and Edwards G
Shipley represented the intervenor, and
the widow was represented by Julius l.
Peyser.