Seitz v. Mitchell,
94 U.S. 580 (1876)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Seitz v. Mitchell, 94 U.S. 580 (1876)

Seitz v. Mitchell

94 U.S. 580


1. The rule of equity practice that when a defendant's answer under oath expressly negatives the allegations of the bill and the testimony of one person only affirms them, the court will not decree in favor of the complainant does

not extend to so much of the answer as is not directly responsive to the bill.

2. Purchases of real or personal property made during coverture by the wife of an insolvent debtor are justly regarded with suspicion. She cannot prevail in contests between his creditors and her involving their right to subject property so acquired to the payment of his debts unless the presumption that it was not paid for out of her separate estate he overcome by affirmative proof.

3. The earnings of the wife while cohabiting with her husband are not, by the Revised Statutes relating to the District of Columbia, made her separate property. She can have them only by his gift, and it is not protected against his creditors.

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.