Mahon v. Gormley
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was an action of assumpsit by James Gormley and Ann his wife v. Richard Mahon and Julia his wife, on a promissory note, as follows:— Pittsburgh, Nov. 13, 1853. Six months after date I promise to pay to Ann McCann or order, one hundred dollars, for value received, without defalcation, with interest from date at eight per cent. Julia MahoN. Richard Mahon plead non assumpsit,” and Julia Mahon plead “coverture.”
Read the full summary
ERROR to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was an action of assumpsit by James Gormley and Ann his wife v. Richard Mahon and Julia his wife, on a promissory note, as follows:— Pittsburgh, Nov. 13, 1853. Six months after date I promise to pay to Ann McCann or order, one hundred dollars, for value received, without defalcation, with interest from date at eight per cent. Julia MahoN. Richard Mahon plead non assumpsit,” and Julia Mahon plead “coverture.” An affidavit of claim was made, in which James Gormley stated, “ that he is the husband of Ann Gormley, formerly Ann McCann; that the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered, December 12, by
Lewis, J.
The Act of 11th April, 1848, “to secure the rights of married women,” was intended for their protection, not for their injury, and must receive such a construction as shall promote that object. It may occasionally be necessary, in order to carry out the intent of the statute, that a married woman should be able to bring suits in her own name for rights which belong to her: 1 Harris 480; 4 Harris 134. And there are cases in which suits may be sustained against her for .the purpose of charging her estate with the liabilities thrown…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Krueger v. NicolaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Koechling v. Henkel, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County1891
- Baker v. Singer Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888