This is the majority opinion of the case Overbeck v. McHale, Trustee, et al. Edna Overbeck brought a bill in equity to set aside a conveyance of real estate by her husband, Bernard Overbeck, on the allegation of fraud on her marital rights. The conveyance was made two days after Bernard married Edna, and she claims it was made without consideration and without her knowledge to defeat her interest in the property by marriage. The court dismissed the bill in equity, finding that there was no fraud in the conveyance, and there was a good and valuable consideration for the transfer. The plaintiff's evidence fell short of sustaining the allegations in her bill, and the court concluded that the bill should be dismissed.

The witness's testimony is not enough to prove fraud in the case of an antenuptial conveyance. The Cancilla v. Bondy case is not applicable because there was a valuable consideration in the current case. The argument that the trust created in the conveyance was a dry trust is not relevant because the three brothers would hold an absolute title as joint tenants. The decree is affirmed, and the appellant must pay the costs.