Vance v. Jacksonville Realty & Mortgage Co.Vance v. Jacksonville Realty & Mortgage Co.
(аfter stating the facts.) — The first assignment which is mainly relied upon for a revеrsal of the decree, questions the correctness of the оrder overruling the demurrer interposed to the bill. It is strenuously contended that, as it plainly appears from the bill, the contract could not be specifically enforced against Mrs. Nance, by reаson of her coverture, therefore the bill is without equity. In other words, аs the appellant contends, “the contract being unenforceable for specific performance, is unenforceable for all purposes.” We had occasion to touch upon this principle in Shields v. Ensign, decided) here at the last term, wherein we held “that the statute does not make the written agreements оf a married woman, otherwise executed, absolutely void and nоn-chargeable upon her estate, but merely that they shall not bе .specifically enforced, a much higher equity than the mere charging for a breach of contract.” See our discussion in that оpinion. We would also refer to the following cases as holding in effect that, although a contract made by a married woman may not be specifically enforced against her by reason of
The decree will be affirmed.