Court Opinion

ID: 9830525
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:16:07.967491+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:23.864454
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
The evidence in this case will warrant the inference that it was the purpose to buy the automobile for the separate use and benefit of Mrs. Brothers; that she was to pay for it out of her money and property and the rents from her land; that she in effect made a part payment on the automobile out of her separate estate, and the note ,was executed to pay the balance, which was to be repaid out of her separate estate and by exempt property, which by law was in her exclusive control. We believe, therefore, the rule announced in McClintic v. Midland can properly be applied in this case. The funds so received was by consent of all parties placed to her separate account in the bank, thereby evidencing an agreement to make it her separate estate. The community never in fact received these funds, but it was paid direct in to her separate estate.
The motion is overruled.