Upson v. Swezey
Supreme Court of Connecticut
General Assumpsit; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County. The declaration was as follows: — “ Then and there to answer unto Alfred A. Upson and Maria Upson, his wife, both of said New Haven, in a plea of the case, whereupon the plaintiffs declare and say that the defendant, on the 18th day of January, 1873, was indebted to Maria Upson, one of the plaintiffs in the above named suit, and wife of the said A.' A. Upson, the other plaintiff in said suit, in the…
Read the full summary
General Assumpsit; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County. The declaration was as follows: — “ Then and there to answer unto Alfred A. Upson and Maria Upson, his wife, both of said New Haven, in a plea of the case, whereupon the plaintiffs declare and say that the defendant, on the 18th day of January, 1873, was indebted to Maria Upson, one of the plaintiffs in the above named suit, and wife of the said A.' A. Upson, the other plaintiff in said suit, in the sum of one hundred and three dollars, in her own separate right, and which was her own proper estate, for so much money…
1Opinion of the CourtPark, J.
We see no error upon this record. The legal title to the chose in action sought to be recovered was by statute vested in the husband as trustee of his wife. Gen. Statutes, tit. 13, sec. 19; Baldwin v. Carter, 17 Conn., 201; Winton v. Barnum, 19 id., 71; Riley v. Riley, 25 id., 154.
The action therefore should have been brought in the name of the husband, as trustee for his wife, as he alone had the legal title; for the right of action at law is vested solely in the party having the legal title, in exclusion of the mere equitable interest. 1 Chitty Pl., 2; Sanford v. Nichols, 14 Conn., 324;…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Baldwin v. CarterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1845
- Gaylord v. PayneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1822
- Sanford v. NicholsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1841