Bovard v. Kettering
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland, county : Of October Term 1882, No. 49. This was an appeal from a judgment of a justice of the peace entered in favor of Jacob D. Kettering, against Sarah E. Bovard, in an action brought against her to recover compensation for services rendered as bar-keeper. Plea, coverture.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland, county : Of October Term 1882, No. 49. This was an appeal from a judgment of a justice of the peace entered in favor of Jacob D. Kettering, against Sarah E. Bovard, in an action brought against her to recover compensation for services rendered as bar-keeper. Plea, coverture. On the trial, before Hunter, P. J., the following facts appeared: On February 3d 1877, the defendant, a married woman, presented her petition to the Court of Common Pleas, declaring her desire to avail herself of the benefit of the Act of April 3d 1872 (P. L. 35),…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Paxson
It was said in Jacobs v. Featherstone, 6 ~W. & S. 346, that “ There is no feme sole trading by a married woman with us, but such as is licensed and regulated by the statute of 1718.” Since that case was decided we have the later Act of May 4th 1855, P. L. 430, which provides that “whensoever any husband, from drunkenness, profligacy or other cause, shall neglect or refuse to provide for his wife, or shall desert her, she shall have all the rights and privileges secured to a feme sole trader under the Act of 22d February 1718,” &c.
It was not contended that the defendant below was within the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Walsh's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Orr & Lindsley v. BornsteinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889