Legal Opinion

Williams v. Coward

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 1, 1853No. Shippen, for plaintiff in errorPublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to the District Court of Philadelphia. The facts appear in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Woodward, J.

— A married woman can neither sue nor be sued on her contract made during coverture. If she contract for necessaries or for goods that go to the use of her husband, the law presumes her to be his agent, and treats the contract as his, and the suit must be against him alone. It is only when an action is brought on her ante-nuptial contract, that she is to be joined as a co-plaintiff or defendant with her husband. Nutz v. Reutter, 1 W. 229. And this because in case of the husband’s death, the action must survive. But in an action on a…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Rigoney v. NeimanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
  2. Ware v. Henry, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County1854

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API