Keen v. Coleman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia. Mary Ann Coleman is a resident of Philadelphia, and has been living there as a widow for several years.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia. Mary Ann Coleman is a resident of Philadelphia, and has been living there as a widow for several years. A few days prior to the 5th of February 1858, the plaintiff, holding promissory notes to the amount of $2300 against George Moore, who was at that time solvent, threatened to bring an action against him on said notes, when Mary Ann Coleman, representing herself as a widow lady, induced the plaintiff to take her bond and mortgage for the sum of $2100 for said notes. The plaintiff agreed to the proposition, and directed his attorney, Lucas Hirst,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered,
by Lowrie, C. J.
The defendant was a married woman when she gave this judgment-bond, and the court below decided that it is not made good by the fact that she represented herself to be single at the time she gave it, and thereby obtained the consideration for which it was given.
She may be liable to an action for the deceit practised by her; but she had no legal power to execute this bond, and by it she *302can not be legally bound. As in the case of infancy, it is not a question of privilege, but of legal incapacity to contract, that stands in the way of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wilt v. WelshSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837
- Penrose ex rel. Hutchinson v. CurrenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
3Cited by4 opinions
- Drake v. YawnCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1923
- Montgomery v. WhitbeckNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1903
- BOSSES v. MAHALSKYSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
- Drake v. YawnCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1923