Flynn v. Messenger
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the municipal court of St. Paul, where the plaintiff sued the defendant (a married woman, living with her husband and children) for wages as a seamstress, under an oral contract of hiring, made between plaintiff and defendant. The defence was that, in making the contract, the defendant acted merely as the agent of her husband, and not on her own account.
1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.
By the common law, a married woman living with her husband is presumed to have authority from him to order such things as are ordinarily required for family use. The rule is laid down by Lord Abinger, in Emmett v. Norton, 8 Car. & P. 506, in these words: “Where a wife is living with her husband, and where, in the ordinary arrangements of her husband’s household, she gives orders to tradesmen for the benefit of her husband and family, and these orders are proper and not extravagant, it is presumed that she has the authority of her husband for so doing. This rule is founded on common sense, for…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Powers v. RussellMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by9 opinions
- Bergh v. WarnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Sandwich Mfg. Co. v. ZellmerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Wagner v. NagelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Kegney v. OvensNew York Supreme Court · 1888
- Boland v. MorrillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.