Allen v. Wilkins
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract brought by the administrator of the estate of Mary Wilkins against the maker of a note payable to her. At the trial in the superior court, it appeared that the note was given in renewal of a former note, which was executed before the passage of St. 1857, c. 249, for work done by Mary Wilkins and her husband, and money lent.
Read the full summary
Contract brought by the administrator of the estate of Mary Wilkins against the maker of a note payable to her. At the trial in the superior court, it appeared that the note was given in renewal of a former note, which was executed before the passage of St. 1857, c. 249, for work done by Mary Wilkins and her husband, and money lent. There was no evidence that during her life her husband attempted to reduce it to possession, or did any act indicating an intention to take it to himself. On this evidence, Ames, J. directed a verdict for the defendant, which was'rendered; and the plaintiff…
1Opinion of the CourtBigelow, C. J.
In a certain sense, a chose in action which becomes the property of the wife during coverture may be said to be the absolute property of the husband. He has a right to demand and receive the money due upon it, to commence ar action upon it in his own name without joining the wife, and if it be negotiable paper, to put it in circulation by his own sole indorsement. In a word, he has the right to do any act to reduce it into his own possession. So long as he and his wife are both living, the entire jus disponendi is in him. It was in this sense that it was said in Stevens v. Beals, 10 Cush.…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Gerber v. State BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915