Neale v. Engle
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
October Term, 1886, No. 89, before Gordon, Trunkey, Sterrett, Green, and Clark, JJ. Error to the Common Pleas of Armstrong County to review a judgment on a verdict for plaintiff in an action of assumpsit to recover for work and labor. The facts are stated in tbe following charge to the jury in the court below, by White, P. J.: This is an action brought by William Engle alone. He sues in his own name the estate of William B. Neale, to recover for the services of his wife.
Read the full summary
October Term, 1886, No. 89, before Gordon, Trunkey, Sterrett, Green, and Clark, JJ. Error to the Common Pleas of Armstrong County to review a judgment on a verdict for plaintiff in an action of assumpsit to recover for work and labor. The facts are stated in tbe following charge to the jury in the court below, by White, P. J.: This is an action brought by William Engle alone. He sues in his own name the estate of William B. Neale, to recover for the services of his wife. The law allows a husband to maintain a suit alone for the services of his wife, unless certain things are clone under our…
1Per curiam
The court below properly determined that the questions arising in this case during the trial were questions of fact, hence, property referable to the jury.
The judgment is affirmed.
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hill v. HillIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
- Blake v. HunsbergerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Fravell v. NettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891