Legal Opinion

Frankford Trust Co. v. Wszolek

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 7, 1936No. Appeal, 355PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

Appellant, a married woman, seeks to be relieved of her obligation on a note because she claims to have signed as accommodation maker. A note or obligation given by a married woman is now presumed to be valid and the burden is upon her to prove its invalidity when she alleges that it comes within the sole exception to her right to contract. We recently stated in Newtown Title & Trust Co. v. Underwood, 317 Pa. 212: “A loan having been made to the wife, and she having given her obligation for it, she is liable to plaintiff, although she and her husband joined in the obligation and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Yeany, ex rel. Gold Standard National Bank v. ShannonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
  2. Newtown T. T. Co. v. Underw'd (Et Al.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  3. Scott v. BedellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Western National Bank v. LevinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  2. Hastings Bank of Hastings v. CovitchSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  3. Cooper v. Lucas Et Ux.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  4. McKean v. Enburg Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  5. York Trust Company v. VanderslootSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API