Bank of America v. Banks,
101 U.S. 240 (1879)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Bank of America v. Banks, 101 U.S. 240 (1879)

Bank of America v. Banks

101 U.S. 240


1. Lands in Mississippi belonging to a married woman, which she, at a stipulated rent, leased to her husband, who entered thereon and cultivated them in his own name and for his own benefit, are not, during the term, her plantation within the meaning of the statute of that state which enacts that all contracts of the husband and wife or either of them for supplies for her plantation may be "enforced, and satisfaction secured out of her separate estate."

2. A contract for such supplies will not bind the separate property of the wife, unless she be the beneficiary of the cultivation, and they in fact are purchased for her account and benefit.

3. A parol lease of lands in Mississippi for one year, made by a woman to her husband, is not invalid.

4. The recital in a deed of trust of her separate estate, executed by her and her husband, that it is given to secure her indebtedness, evidenced by her and his notes, does not estop her from showing that they were given for sup plies furnished for a plantation, which he cultivated in his name and for his benefit.

5. In order to work an estoppel, the parties to a deed must be sui juris competent to make it effectual as a contract.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.