Legal Opinion

McCorkle v. Goldsmith

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided January 15, 1895PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel Dillon, Judge. Section 6864, Revised Statutes, when read in the light of the rules laid down for the interpretation of statutes, does not justify the construction contended for by respondent, and given it by the court in this case. The disability at common law applied as well to the husband as to the wife.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel Dillon, Judge. Section 6864, Revised Statutes, when read in the light of the rules laid down for the interpretation of statutes, does not justify the construction contended for by respondent, and given it by the court in this case. The disability at common law applied as well to the husband as to the wife. Unless, therefore, there is something in this section which removes the husband’s disability to contract with tbe wife, tbe wording of the section is insufficient to authorize them to contract with each other. The husband was…

1Opinion of the CourtBiggs, J.

The defendant is the wife of Christopher H. Goldsmith. Dissensions having arisen, they were living apart from each other. They owned a house jointly,- and, after the separation, the tenant paid the rent to the defendant. In 1893, Goldsmith, who had failed to get the tenant to attorn to him or to pay him the rent, commenced an action before a justice of the peace, by a landlord’s summons, to recover the rent and the possession of the premises. That suit culminated in a judgment in his favor. The tenant took an appeal to the circuit court, and the defendant signed the appeal bond. In the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Major v. HolmesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Rice, Stix & Co. v. SallySupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
  2. Grimes v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
  3. Dorsett v. DorsettMissouri Court of Appeals · 1936
  4. Huss v. CulverMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
  5. Lindsay v. ArchibaldMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896

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