Turner v. Coe
Supreme Court of Connecticut
On the hearing of the bill stated in the preceding case, at Middletown, February term, 1822, before Brainard, J. the defendants offered to prove, that after the delivery of the deed mentioned in the bill, executed by the plaintiffs and Joseph Hale to Hezekiah Hale, by Joseph Coe, on or about the 10th of May, 1821, Anna Turner, one of the plaintiffs, made certain admissions and declarations, in the presence and hearing of Joseph Coe, and sundry other persons, but not in the…
Read the full summary
On the hearing of the bill stated in the preceding case, at Middletown, February term, 1822, before Brainard, J. the defendants offered to prove, that after the delivery of the deed mentioned in the bill, executed by the plaintiffs and Joseph Hale to Hezekiah Hale, by Joseph Coe, on or about the 10th of May, 1821, Anna Turner, one of the plaintiffs, made certain admissions and declarations, in the presence and hearing of Joseph Coe, and sundry other persons, but not in the presence of Joel Turner, her husband, relating to said deed and the delivery of it to Hezekiah Hale, which were relevant…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch. J,
Where an action is brought by or against the husband, or by the husband and wife jointly in right of the wife, the declarations of the wife are not evidence against him. If the husband bring an action of assumpsit for wages earned by his wife, her acknowledgment of having been paid, is not evi dence. Hall v. Hill, 2 Strange 1094. So, in an action of tress-pass against husband and wife, the wife's confession of a tress pass committed by her, cannot be given in evidence to affect the husband. Denn v. White & ux. 7 Term Rep. 122. And in a suit by husband and wife, in right of the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Donalds v. PlumbSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1831