Bentley & Co. v. Simmons
Bentley & Co. v. Simmons
Opinion of the Court
Tbe exception taken is to tbe overruling of a demurrer to tbe complaint, which describes tbe husband as suing in tbe capacity of trustee of bis wife, to recover rents and profits of her separate statutory estate. Tbe corpus, or property out of which tbe rents and profits are alleged to bave accrued is specified.
R. C. 2372 makes tbe husband trustee of bis wife’s separate estate, with right to manage and control tbe same, but without accountability to her for tbe rents, income, and profits. R. C. 2525 requires husband and wife to join, when she has an interest in tbe subject-matter of tbe suit; unless the’ suit relate
The same end is equally attained by the husband suing as trustee of his wife. And there is this propriety in it, that his receipt for the property is a full discharge. R. C. 2375. Pickens v. Oliver, supra, means no more than that the wife must not be joined in such suit. The rents, &c., do not belong to the husband. If he neglects to make a proper application of them, he will be removed from his trusteeship. Boaz v. Boaz, 36 Ala. 334. He holds them as trustee with accountability, unless he otherwise supports his family, and it is only under certain circumstances that the law presumes a gift to him of them from his wife. Roper v. Roper, 29 Ala. 247; R. C. 2383, 2384. As, therefore, the husband is not absolute owner of the rents, income, and profits of his wife’s separate estate, he is her trustee of them, and may sue to recover them in that capacity. The demurrer was properly overruled.
The judgment is affirmed.
Reference
- Status
- Published