Rambaut v. White
Rambaut v. White
Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
The facts essential to a proper understanding of this case are these: Plaintiffs held a judgment against John-M. White, whose wife died seized of an undivided interest in certain real estate, leaving him and two minor children surviving; he and other parties in interest joined in an agreement to convey the property, subject to the approval of the orphans’ court, and subsequently the orphan's’ court authorized the guardian of the minors to join in the sale. White signed a paper, attached to the petition for authority to sell, in which he stipulated that he, without consideration, would join in the execution of the deed to the purchaser. With matters in this shape, and before the deed was executed, plaintiffs issued a foreign attachment on their judgment, and White’s interest as tenant by the curtesy in the real estate was attached. The question for solution is whether White, at the time of the issuance of the writ, had any interest in the property which could be attached.
Appellant contends that, since the writ did not issue until after White had joined in the agreement pf sale and signed the petition to the orphans’ court, he, by agreeing to surrender his curtesy without consideration, in effect released his estate to his children, and so completely divested himself of all interest as to leave nothing which the attachment could reach; but with this we cannot agree. No actual release of his interest was executed and, at the time the attachment was levied, only a very small part of the consideration money had
The judgment is affirmed.
Reference
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Foreign attachment—Attachment of curtesy—Sale of real estate —Husband and wife—Creditors’ rights. 1. Where a wife dies seized of an interest in real estate, leaving to survive her a husband and minor children, and the husband enters into an agreement with other parties in interest to sell the real estate and joins in a proceeding to secure the consent of the orphans’ court to the sale of the minor’s interest, foreign attaehment levied against the husband’s share will bind it, where it appears that no actual release of such interest was made, only a small part of the consideration had been paid, and that no deed had been delivered; and-this ig the case although the husband had agreed in the orphans’ court proceedings to convey his interest without consideration. x 2. In such case the husband, by his agreement to convey without consideration, could not legally augment the shares of his children in the purchase money at the expense of his creditors.