Case Name: Payne vs. Pollard, &c.
Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Decision Date: 1867-01-23
Citations: 3 Bush 127
Docket Number: 
Parties: Payne vs. Pollard, &c.
Judges: 
Reporter: Kentucky Reports
Volume: 66
Pages: 127–132

Head Matter:
CASE 39 — PETITION EQUITY —
JANUARY 23.
Payne vs. Pollard, &c.
APPEAL PROM BOYD CIRCUIT COURT.
1. Real estate acquired by purchase by a woman, and conveyed to her, her heirs and assigns, without the exclusion of the marital rights of any future husband, is not held by her as separate estate, and, at her death, leaving a husband surviving her, such real estate descended to her heirs-at-law, without any power in her to deprive them thereof by last will. (Secs. 2 and 4, chap, 106, 2 Slant. Rev. Stat., 457.)
2. A sheriff who levies an execution on land held jointly by the execution defendant and others, who are minors, should proceed as required by the act of February 12, 1858. (2 Slant. Rev. Stat., 513.) He should not make a sale, but return the facts. Although a sale and conveyance, made without complying with said act, pass no title, yet the execution creditor acquired a lien by the levy, and may thereupon proceed, by equitable proceedings, to partition and subject to the satisfaction of his execution the interest of the debtor so levied on.
Ed. F. Dulin, For Appellant,
CITED—
2 Bright on Husband and Wife, secs. 10, 11, p. 224.
1 Jarman on Wills, pp. 27, a, b, c, d, e.
Rev. Siat., “ Wills,” secs. 2, 4, 29,2 Stant., 457 and 466.
Jambs M. Rice and A. J. James, For Appellees,
CITED—
18 B. Mon., 259; Hughey vs. Sidwell’s heirs.
2 Metcalfe, 342; Henderson vs. Hayne.
Revised Stat., chap. 106, secs. 29 and 58, 2 Stant., 466, 468.
1 Monroe, 155; Smith vs. Morcman.
Williams on Executors, 2 Am. ed., 368-9.
1 Paige, J76; Clark vs. Fisher.
4 Mon., 422; Payne’s Will.
5 Littcll, 274; Wells’s Will. '
9 Dana, 41; King vs. Bullock.
8 B. Mon., 348; Singleton’s Will.
10 B. Mon., 474; Tibbatts vs. Berry.

Opinion:
JUDGE WILLIAMS
delivered tiie opinion of tiie court:
By section 2, chapter 106, on "Wills," 2 Stanton's Revised Statutes, 457, it is provided, every person of sound mind, who may have arrived at majority, not being a married woman, may, by last will, dispose of their estate.
By section 4, " a married woman may, by will, dispose of any estate, secured to her separate use, by deed or devise, or in the exercise of a special power to that effect."
Mrs. Payne, the testatrix, had seven children by her first husband, H. B. Pollard. After his death, and before her marriage to Spencer Payne, she acquired, by purchase, and deed, the legal title to a tract of land, which was not a separate estate, but is general to her, her heirs and assigns, without the exclusion of the marital rights of any future husband.
As Spencer Payne survived her, she was a married woman at her death, and could legally pass, by last will, only such separate estate as she then had. This real estate, therefore, descended to her heirs-at-law, without any power in her to deprive them thereof by last will; and the interest of Geo. B. Pollard, one of her children and heirs-at-law, was subject to be levied upon under execution against him. But, as it is evident that it was held jointly with others, the officer should have proceeded as directed by the act of February 12, 1858. (2 Stanton's Revised Statutes, 513.)
If the joint owners, being notified by the officer of the levy, notify him that they claim a joint interest, it is his duty to return the facts, and the plaintiffs are thereupon to proceed in equity. Here the officer knew of the joint ownership, and that the joint owners were minors. The officer should not have made a sale; but the statute secures a lien to the execution creditor, which he can enforce by equitable proceedings.
It was erroneous to dismiss plaintiff's petition, notwithstanding the sale and conveyance by the officer was invalid; yet appellant acquired a valid lien by the levy of his execution, which the court, on proper proceedings, should perfect, by a sale of the land levied upon, to satisfy it; and, to this end, should first partition G. B. Pollard's interest, after having all necessary parties properly before the court.
Judgment reversed, with directions for further proceedings as herein indicated.