TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Summers v. Donnell

Wm. F. Summers, Ex'r v. Mollie E. Donnell

Summers v. Donnell, 54 Tenn. 565 (1872)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Tennessee Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 21, 1872
Judges
Nicholson
Citations
54 Tenn. 5657 Heisk. 5651872 Tenn. LEXIS 86
Headnotes
Doweb. A party dying insolvent, dower was allotted to his widow in a store-house, his only realty. Held, that she could not he compelled on behalf of creditors to accept in lieu of dower in specie a sum in gross out of the proceeds of the property. Decree for a sale to pay debts, subject to her dower right to receive during her life one-third of the annual rental. Case cited. Lewis v. James, 8 Hum., 541.
Summary
EROM SUMNER. From the Chancery Court, September Term, 1871. Chas. G. Smith, Ch.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Nicholson

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Nicholson, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Robert E. Donnell died in Sumner county, leaving' his widow surviving him. The only real estate owned by him was a store-house in Gallatin. His widow dissented from his will, and applied to the County Court for dower, which' was allotted to her. The house not being divisible, her dower assigned was the one-third of the house and lot. The yearly rental value of the house and lot is about $500, and the market value of the house and lot is from $2,500 to $3,000.

*566 After dower was allotted the executor filed his bill, suggesting the insolvency of the estate and praying for a sale of the house and lot, and that the entire property be sold, including the dower, and that a gross sum out of the proceeds' be assigned to the widow as dower. She answered, not resisting the sale, but insisting that it should be made subject to her right of dower in the property.

Proof was taken as to the value of the house and lot and its annual rental value, and as to how the interest of the widow and creditors would be affected by a sale made absolutely, or reserving the widow’s dower right. The Chancellor ordered an absolute sale, requiring the widow to take a sum in gross as her dower in the property. From this decree the widow has appealed.

Upon the death of her husband and her dissent from his will, the right of the widow to the use and occupation of one-third of the house and lot attached, and was vested. As the -dower could not be set apart by metes and bounds, her right to one-tliird of the annual rental value of the property was vested and fixed. Lewis v. James, 8 Hum., 541 . Her right was the use and occupation of one-third of the property in specie. This right was superior to that of the creditors, and could not - be affected by a sale for their benefit. Her election to take the equivalent of the use and occupation, or to take a sum in gross in lieu thereof, could not be interfered with or controlled by any decree of the Court. It was an absolute fixed right, beyond the power of the Court to impair.

*567 It follows that the decree of the Chancellor was erroneous, in so far as it requires the widow to accept a sum in gross in lieu of dower. A decree will be rendered here ordering a sale of the house and lot subject to the dower right of the widow to receive during her life one-third of the rental value of the property.

The costs of the case will be paid out of the proceeds of the sale

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1875–1876: 11887–1888: 11927–1928: 11931–1932: 11947–1948: 11957–1958: 11973–1974: 118752026peak 1875 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Cripps v. Cripps302 S.W.2d 340 (Tenn. 1957) · Dissent
  2. Clift v. Clift87 Tenn. 17 (1888)
  3. Mabry v. Mabry5 Tenn. App. 307 (1927)
  4. Wilhite v. Farley15 Tenn. App. 317 (1932)
  5. Wyrick v. Hale209 S.W.2d 50 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1947)
  6. Yarbro v. Easley525 S.W.2d 495 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1974)

Most recent

  1. Yarbro v. Easley525 S.W.2d 495 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1974)
  2. Cripps v. Cripps302 S.W.2d 340 (Tenn. 1957) · Dissent
  3. Wyrick v. Hale209 S.W.2d 50 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1947)
  4. Wilhite v. Farley15 Tenn. App. 317 (1932)
  5. Mabry v. Mabry5 Tenn. App. 307 (1927)
  6. Clift v. Clift87 Tenn. 17 (1888)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list