Foxworth v. Ex'r. of White
Foxworth v. Ex'r. of White
Opinion of the Court
By the Acts of 1786 and 1799, any woman entitled to dower or thirds in lands, of which her deceased husband was seized in fee, at any time during the coverture, may sue out, from the clerk of the Court, a summons directed to the heir at law of the deceased (if of full age,) or to his or her guardian, if he or she shall be a minor; and if there be no guardian, to the executor or administrator of tire deceased, or to any other person or persons who may be in possession of the land, to shew cause why a writ for the admeasurement of her dower should not be issued. If the party summoned appears to show cause, the Act does not direct in what form and manner it shall be shown ; nor how the same shall be tried. In Williams v. Lawrence it was settled, as a rule of practice, that the entry of appearance, by the party summoned, is a sufficient showing of cause to require the demandant to declare.
The plaintiff’s declaration pursues strictly the form to be found in 3 Ch. Plead. 1315. This form is sanctioned by the pleadings in Williams v. Gwyn, and Robins v. Crutchly. The defendants have demurred generally; and for causes of demurrer, show, first, that possession of Abel Foxworth, the deceased husband of the plaintiff, is not averred. This it was clearly unnecessary to do, because the plaintiff is dowable of the seizin of her husband. The next ground is, that the seizin of her husband is not alleged. It is not expressly alleged, and by the general rules of pleading it would seem necessary that it should be ; yet the cases cited, and others
The motion is dismissed.'
Motion refused.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.