Legal Opinion

Drew v. Tarbell

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 15, 1875PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Contract on two joint and several promissory notes payable to the plaintiff and signed by both the defendants. The defendants answered severally, admitting the signing of the notes, but denying consideration, and the wife also pleaded her coverture.

Read the full summary

Contract on two joint and several promissory notes payable to the plaintiff and signed by both the defendants. The defendants answered severally, admitting the signing of the notes, but denying consideration, and the wife also pleaded her coverture. Trial in the Superior Court before Aldrich, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows : The notes were procured by the husband and passed to the plaintiff without any communication between the plaintiff and the wife in regard thereto. For the purpose of charging the wife, the plaintiff called the husband as a witness, and…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

The judge rightly refused to allow the husband to testify to a private conversation with his wife. St. 1870, e. 393, § 1. Dexter v. Booth, 2 Allen, 559. Bliss v. Franklin, 13 Allen, 244. Exceptions overruled.

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. HayesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
  2. Fuller v. FullerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900

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

Powered by the Exa API