Claremont Bank v. Clark
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
The action was against the White Mountains Railroad and others, as principal defendants, and Lucy Clark and others, as trustees. Lucy Clark filed the usual plea, and the plaintiff elected to take her disclosure.
Read the full summary
The action was against the White Mountains Railroad and others, as principal defendants, and Lucy Clark and others, as trustees. Lucy Clark filed the usual plea, and the plaintiff elected to take her disclosure. Her disclosure was as follows :— “Interrogatories proposed by A. F. Snow, Att’y for the plaintiffs, to said Lucy Clark, sued as trustee aforesaid: Jit. 1. Had you at the time of the service of the plaintiffs’ writ upon you, or have you at any time since had, any money, goods, chattels, rights or credits of the defendants, or any of them, in your hands or possession? ■ A ns. I am…
1Opinion of the CourtBartlett, J.
By the statutes of this State a married jyomah muy,under certain circumstances, make contracts, and with .her husband even, which will be valid at law: Albin v. Lord, 39 N. H. 196; and in various cases may sue and be sued in her own name as if she were sole and unmarried; R. S. ch. 149,sec. 3; Laws 1846, ch. 327, sec. 4; Laws 1860, ch. 2342, sec. 3; Jordan v. Cummings, 143 N. H. 34; Ames v. Foster, 42 N. H. 382. The terms of these statutes are so broad as to allow, in certain instances, suits at law between husband and wife, and they are not coupled with any alternative clause like that in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Smith v. GormanSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1856
3Cited by2 opinions
- Clough v. RussellSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875
- Clough v. RussellSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875