Pond v. Carpenter
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Tbis action was brought in the District Court for Namsey County. The allegations of the complaint, sufficient for an understanding of the case, are substantially as follows: that the defendant Maria E. Carpenter, who is the wife of the defendant Warren Carpenter, was the owner of a hotel and furniture therein, and with the consent of her husband was keeping such hotel in her own name, on her own account, for her own exclusive use and benefit, and that while so doing, she…
Read the full summary
Tbis action was brought in the District Court for Namsey County. The allegations of the complaint, sufficient for an understanding of the case, are substantially as follows: that the defendant Maria E. Carpenter, who is the wife of the defendant Warren Carpenter, was the owner of a hotel and furniture therein, and with the consent of her husband was keeping such hotel in her own name, on her own account, for her own exclusive use and benefit, and that while so doing, she purchased of and from the plaintiff goods, &c., of the value of $672.80, to be used and consumed in and about such hotel…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Cowt.
McMillan, J.
This is a demurrer by the defendants to the complaint on the ground that it does not contain facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
The plaintiff claims that the complaint is sufficient on two grounds.
1. Upon the facts alleged he is entitled to the ordinary money judgment against both Mr. and Mrs. Carpenter, on their joint and several promise, and execution against the property of either of them, as in ordinary cases:
2. That the facts alleged entitle the plaintiff, in equity, to the relief sought against the separate property of Mrs. Carpenter. *432We sliall…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Radford v. CarwileWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1879
- Heacock v. HeacockSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
- Tuttle v. HoweSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1869
- Kingsley v. GilmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1870