Smith v. Martin
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Hillsdale; Chester, J. Assumpsit by Edward J. Smith against William T. Martin and Cora Martin, his wife, for goods sold and delivered to the wife prior to the marriage. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
The sole question presented upon this record is, Have the Constitution and act relative to the rights of married women abrogated the rule of the common law that a husband is liable for the antenuptial contracts of his wife? The court below held that they had not: By section 5, art. 16, of the Constitution, all the property of every female acquired before marriage, and all property acquired after marriage by gift, grant, inheritance, or devise, remains her property during coverture, and is not liable for the husband’s debts, and may be devised and bequeathed by her as if she were unmarried.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bertles v. . NunanNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Randall v. RandallMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
- Fisher v. ProvinMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
- Tong v. MarvinMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
- Kies v. YoungSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1897
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- People v. Grand Trunk Western RailroadMichigan Court of Appeals · 1966
- Cora Mitchell v. City of Warren, MICourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2015
- Trotter v. Hamill Manufacturing Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1985
- Cora Mitchell v. City of Warren, MICourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2015
- Delude v. RaasakkaMichigan Court of Appeals · 1972
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.