Capacity Of Parties. - Married Women. Continued
Description
This section is from the book "The Law Of Contracts", by William Herbert Page. Also available from Amazon: Commercial Contracts: A Practical Guide to Deals, Contracts, Agreements and Promises.
Capacity Of Parties. - Married Women. Continued
10 Am. St. Rep. 648; 2 L. R. A. 703; 10 S. W. 305; Palmer v. Palmer, 26 Utah 31; 61 L. R. A. 641; 72 Pac. 3; Bartlett v. Collins, 109 Wis. 477; 83 Am. St. Rep. 928; 85 N. W. 703.
2 Parker v. Moore, 115 Fed. 799; reversing 111 Fed. 470; Pope v. Hanke, 155 111. 617; 28 L. R. A. 568; 40 N. E. 839; Sondheim v. Gilbert, 117 Ind. 71; 10 Am. St. Rep. 23; 5 L. R. A. 432; 18 N. E. 687; Minzesheimer v. Doolittle, 60 N. J. Eq. 394; 45 Atl. 611.
3 Gooch v. Faucett, 122 N. C. 270; 39 L. R. A. 835; 29 S. E. 362.
4 Pope v. Hanke, 155 111. 617; 28 L. R. A. 568; 40 N. E. 839.
5 Minzesheimer v. Doolittle, 60 N. J. Eq. 394; 45 Atl. 611.
6 Palmer v. Palmer, 26 Utah 31; 61 L. R. A. 641; 72 Pac. 3.
1 Union National Bank v. Chapman, 169 N. Y. 538; 88 Am. St. Rep. 614; 57 L. R. A. 513; 62 N. E. 672.
2 Nixon v. Halley, 78 111. 611; Brown v. Dalton, 105 Ky. 669; 88
Am. St. Rep. 325; 49 S. W. 443; Baer v. Terry, 108 La. 597; 92 Am. St. Rep. 394; 51 L. R. A. 417; 32 So. 353; State Bank v. Maxson, 123 Mich. 250; 81 Am. St. Rep. 196; 82 N. W. 31; Benton v. Bank, 45 Neb. 850; 64 N. W. 227; Thompson v. Taylor, 66 N. J. L. 253; 88 Am. St. Rep. 485; 54 L. R. A. 585; 49 Atl. 544; reversing 65 N. J. L. 107; 46 Atl. 567; Union National Bank v. Chapman, 169 N. Y. 538; 88 Am. St. Rep. 614; 57 L. R. A. 513; 62 N. E. 672; Wood v. Wheeler. Ill N. C. 231; 16 S. E. 418; Evans v. Cleary, 125 Pa. St. 204; 11 Am. St. Rep. 886; 17 Atl. 440; Robinson v. Queen, 87 Tenn. 445; 10 Am. St. Rep. 690; 3 L. R. A. 214; 11 S. W. 38; Dulin v. McCaw, 39 W. Va. 721; 20 S. E. 681; Young v. Hart, 101 Va. 480; 44 S. E. 703.
3 Young v. Hart, 101 Va. 480; 44 S. E. 703. See post, this section.
4 Marks v. Bank, 110 La. 659; 34 So. 725.
5 Gibson v. Sublett, 82 Ky. 596; Wright v. Remington, 41 N. J. L. 48; 32 Am. Rep. 180; Robinson v. Queen, 87 Tenn. 445; 10 Am. St. Rep. 690; 3 L. R. A. 214; 11 S. W. 38; Dulin v. McCaw, 39 W. Va. 721; 20 S. E. 681.
6 See Sec. 1717.
7 Bell v. Packard, 69 Me. 105; 31 Am. Rep. 251; Milliken v. Pratt, 125 Mass. 374; 28 Am. Rep. 241; Thompson v. Taylor, 66 N. J. L. 253; 88 Am. St. Rep. 485; 54 L. R. A. 585; 49 Atl. 544; reversing 65 N. J. L. 107; 46 Atl. 567.
8 Thompson v. Taylor, 66 N. J. L. 253; 88 Am. St. Rep. 485; 54 L. R. A. 585 ; 49 Atl. 544 ; reversing 65 N. J. L. 107; 46 Atl. 567.
9 Unirn National Bank v. Chapman, 109 N. Y. 538; 88 Am. St. Rep. 614; 5.' L. R. A. 513; 62 N. E. 672.
10 Brown v. Dalton. 105 Ky. 669; 88 St. Rep. 325; 49 S. W. 443.
11 Baer v. Terry, 108 La. 597; 92 Am. St. Rep. 394; 32 So. 353. (A previous suit for the value of the mules had failed. 105 La. 479; 29
12 Robison v. Pease, 28 Ind. App. 610; 63 N. E. 479.
13 See Sec. 1729.
14 Freeman's Appeal, 68 Conn. 533; 57 Am. St. Rep. 112; 37 L. R. A. 452; 37 Atl. 420; Hanover National Bank v. Howell, 118 N. C. 271; 23 S. E. 1005; Armstrong v. Best, 112 N. C. 59; 34 Am. St. Rep. 473; 25 L. R. A. 188; 17 S. E. 14; First National Bank v. Shaw, 109 Tenn. 237; 97 Am. St. Rep. 840; 70 S. W. 807. 164
15 Milliken v. Pratt, 125 Mass. 374; 28 Am. Rep. 241; Case v. Dodge, 18 R. I. 661; 29 Atl. 7S5.
16 Taylor v. Sharp, 108 N. C. 377; 13 S. E. 138.
17 First National Bank v. Mitchell, 92 Fed. 565 (involving the same parties and the same transaction as Freeman's Appeal. 68 Conn. 533; 57 Am. St. Rep. 112; 37 L. R. A. 452; 37 Atl. 420. and directly contrary thereto) ; Thompson v. Taylor. 66 N. J. L. -253; 88 Am. St. Rep.
485; 54 L. R. A. 585; 49 Atl. 544; reversing 65 N. J. L. 107; 46 Atl. 567.
18 First National Bank v. Shaw, 109 Tenn. 237; 97 Am. St. Rep. 840; 59 L. R. A. 498; 70 S. W. 807.
19 First National Bank v. Shaw, 109 Tenn. 237; 97 Am. St. Rep. 840; 59 L. R. A. 498; 70 S. W. 807.
20 Smoot v. Judd, 101 Mo. 673; 84 Am. St. Rep. 738; 61 S. W. S54.
21 Hayden v. Stone, 13. R. I. 106.
22 Cochran v. Benton, 126 Ind. 58; 25 N. E. 870; Rush v. Landers. 107 La. 549; 57 L. R. A. 353; 32 So. 95.
23 Rush v. Landers, 107 La. 549; 57 L. R. A. 353; 32 So. 95.
24 Cochran v. Benton. 126 Ind. 58; 25 N. E. 870; Swank v. Hufnagle. Ill Ind. 453; 12 N. E. 303.
25 Thompson v. Kyle, 39 Fla. 582; 63 Am. St. Rep. 193; 23 So. 12: Shacklett v. Polk, 51 Miss. 378:
Wick v. Dawson, 42 W. Va. 43; 24 S. E. 587.
26 Thompson v. Kyle, 39 Fla. 582; 63 Am. St. Rep. 193; 23 So. 12.
27 Frierson v. Williams, 57 Miss. 451. Contra, Evans v. Beaver, 50 O. S. 190; 40 Am. St. Rep. 666; 33 N. E. 643.
28 Poison v. Stewart, 167 Mass. 211; 57 Am. St. Rep. 452; 36 L. R. A. 771; 45 N. E. 737; Wood v. Wheeler, 111 N. C. 231; 16 S. E. 418.
29 Poison v. Stewart, 167 Mass. 211; 57 Am. St. Rep. 452; 36 L. R. A. 771; 45 N. E. 737.
30 State Bank v. Maxson, 123 Mich. 250; 81 Am. St. Rep. 196; 82 N. W. 31; Merrielles v. State Bank, 5 Tex. Civ. App. 483; 24 S. W. 564.
31 State Bank v. Maxson. 123 Mich. 250; 81 Am. St. Rep. 196; 82 N. W. 31.
Continue to:
My Books
