STICKNEY V. STICKNEY, 131 U. S. 227 (1889)
Subscribe to Cases that cite 131 U. S. 227
Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/131/227/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/131/227/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Stickney v. Stickney, 131 U.S. 227 (1889)
Stickney v. Stickney
No. 243
Argued April 9-10, 1889
Decided May 13, 1889
131 U.S. 227
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Syllabus
In a suit in equity in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, it is competent, under the acts of Congress, for a married woman who is a party thereto to disclose, as a witness, directions given by her to her husband respecting the investment of her separate property, though she could not be compelled to make such disclosure against her wishes. Rev.Stat.Dist.Col. §§ 876, 877.
There is no higher presumption that a married woman in the District of Columbia intends, by placing her separate money in the hands of her husband, thereby to make a gift of it to him than there is that a third person has such intent when he in like manner deposits money with him. 16 Stat. 45, c. 23.