Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1909-10-14
QUESTION
OF RIGHT OF
CURTESY
Supreme Court to Settle the
Right of a Husband to
Deceased Wife'S
Property.

preme court today which contains
considerable interesting and import
ant phases of the law and property
rights amounting to large sums are
hinged on the outcome and final )rIn-
and prior to the marriage of Mrs.
of the case is Runyan against Win
stock ct al and the respondents in
the case are the sons and daughters
of Mrs. Runyan by former marriage
and prior to tn emarriage of Mrs.
Runyan to the appellant, Runyan, she
was the owner in fee Of lot c in block
i'm Coles addition to East Port
land, but before her death she deed
cd the property to her children, the
respondents. and the appellant herein
brought suit to be declared the own
er OF one-half OF the property by
curtesy. The ciruit court returned
judgment in favor of the defendant
children and Runyan now takes an
appeal to determine whether a mans
curtesy in his deceased wife's prop
erty is effective or whether the law
covering these rights Is repealed.
In the respondents brief Il is con-
tended that the property involved in
this action belonged formerly TO Mrs.
Runyan separately. Subsequent 20
her marriage with the appellant, and
prior to her death. Mrs. Runyan by
deed conveyed the property TO the
children. The respondents hold and
point out with authorities that Sec
ton 5544 OF B. & c. Code OF Oregon,
being the statute OF 1884 defining or
granting estates by curtesy, and Sec
tions 533 land 5547 have been SUI
perseded, abrogated and repealed by
Section 8, Article XIV, OF the state
Constitution. and Sections 5244. 5245
524S, 5249 and $3.50 of d. & c. Code
and Tenancy by curtesy In this
state. is now abolished, the wife may
sell or convey fee simple title 70
her separate property by her sole
deed, and upon her death her hus-
band has no tenancy by curtesy in
such property though he did not
join in the deed.
In the general laws enacted by the
legislature OF 1907. there Is an
amendment TO Section 5544 OF 3. &
c. Code and Statutes of oregon. re-
lating to the curtesy OF the husband
In lands of his deceased wife, which
reads as follows: The widower OF
every deceased person shall be en-
titled las tenant by curtesy, to the
use. during his natural life, OF one
half part of all lands whereof his wife
was seized OF an estate OF inheritance
at any time during the marriage, al
though such husband and wife may
not have issue born alive. unless he
is lawfully barred thereof"
Although the case at issue today be
fore the supreme court does not come
under the 1907 laws, had the wife co
veyed land since the enactment OF the
1907 law was adopted. the appellant
would be a lawful claimant TO one
half the property at issue.
The property in litigatio mis- a val
liable holding in Portland, and owing
to this. the case was carried up 10
the higher tribunals. Attorney Ralph
Moody is representing the respond
ents while Geo. A. Shepard is hand
ling the appellants interest. Should
the supreme court mold that tenancy
by curtesy was valid at the time the
widow of the appellant conveyed the
property there win probably be much
other litigation instituted by persons
throughout the state who should have
come into possession at the death OF
a wife under the curtesy law.