Lost Husband And Houses

Summary

Lost Husband And Houses is a news article^[1].

Key Facts

• Lost Husband And Houses's image is recorded as Ira Lowe (1868-1907) and Adelheid Oppenheimer (1848-1907) in The Sun of New York City, New York on 16 February 1897.jpg^[2].
• Lost Husband And Houses's instance of is recorded as news article^[3].
• Lost Husband And Houses's language of work or name is recorded as English^[4].
• Lost Husband And Houses's publication date is recorded as +1897-02-16T00:00:00Z^[5].
• Lost Husband And Houses's main subject is recorded as Ira Lowe^[6].
• Lost Husband And Houses's main subject is recorded as Adelheid Oppenheimer^[7].
• Lost Husband And Houses's main subject is recorded as Roger Atkinson Pryor^[8].
• Lost Husband And Houses's main subject is recorded as romance scam^[9].
• Lost Husband And Houses's published in is recorded as The Sun^[10].
• Lost Husband And Houses's title is recorded as Lost Husband And Houses. Mrs. Lowe Can't Get Back the Real Estate She Gave Away with Her Affections.^[11].
• Lost Husband And Houses's first line is recorded as The action of Adelheid Lowe to set aside deeds by which she conveyed to Ira Lowe, on the eve of her marriage to him in August, 1894, a half interest in two houses, has been dismissed without costs by Justice Pryor of the Supreme Court.^[12].
• Lost Husband And Houses's copyright status is recorded as public domain^[13].
• Lost Husband And Houses's quotation or excerpt is recorded as The action of Adelheid Lowe to set aside deeds by which she conveyed to Ira Lowe, on the eve of her marriage to him in August, 1894, a half interest in two houses, has been dismissed without costs by Justice Pryor of the Supreme Court. The houses are 1150 Second avenue and 365 Bushwick avenue, Brooklyn, with equities of about $15,000. They came to her from her first husband. She had six living children when she married Lowe, when she met through a marriage broker, and she was about fifteen years the senior of Lowe, she charged that his had made love to two of her daughters, contrary to an agreement to care for all her children, and that she had given the deeds through undue influence. In dismissing the case Justice Pryor said: "Upon the evidence. It is impossible to escape the conclusion that the conveyance sought to be set aside was a voluntary act of the plaintiff, not induced by any fraud or undue influence on the part of the defendant. The real consideration for the conveyance was the defendant's promise to marry the plaintiff, and a he did marry her, and is still her husband, there is no failure of consideration and no possibility of placing the parties in status quo. If it be argued that the abandonment of the plaintiff by the defendant is equivalent to a dissolution of the marriage the answer is that it is not apparent upon the proof, but that she was the cause of the separation."^[14].

Body

Designation and Status

Lost Husband And Houses's instance of is recorded as news article^[3].