Court Opinion

ID: 9831409
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:05:03.705321+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:34.586623
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellant has filed a very vigorous and earnest motion for rehearing, in deference to which we have again reviewed the record, with particular reference to the specific contentions of appellant, and see no reason for receding from the original disposition.
The case actually presented in the record seems to be a simple one, out - of which arose the controlling question of whether the proceeds of a crop grown on land the use of which for that particular crop year was given by the -owner, as a gift, to Mrs. Krause, individually, constituted her separate property. The crop was planted, cultivated, and harvested by Mrs. Krause and her husband and children, and by laborers employed by her and paid by her out of a part of the proceeds of a loan obtained by her husband upon the community estate. There was no tracing of funds or efforts which could be given the effect of converting the proceeds of the crop from its presumed character of community property, into the claimed character of the wife’s separate property. Appellant raises some very interesting questions of law, and presents them with much ability and ingenuity, but the case actually made is the simple one, disposed of in the original opinion, to which we adhere.
Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.