Lay Grae v. Peterson
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal from an assistant justice’s court. Lay Grae sued Peterson and wife for money lent to the latter while sole. The only evidence in support of his claim, was the admission of the fact by the wife, after her marriage. The defendants objected to the evidence, but it was received by the court, and a judgment thereupon rendered in favor of' the plaintiff. The defendants appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtBy the Court. Sandford, J.
This point does not appear to have been decided in this state, but there is no doubt about it in principle. The action is really against the husband, and the wife’s statements are no more evidence against him than are those of a stranger. Where a wife acts as agent of her *339husband, her declarations are admissible in the same instances, and on the same grounds, that the declarations of other agents would be received. In her relation as wife merely, her declarations are inadmissible. The authorities, both direct and analogous, are abundant in support of this conclusion. We will refer to a few of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Burgen v. TribbleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1834
3Cited by3 opinions
- Macondray v. WardleNew York Supreme Court · 1858
- Macondray v. WardleNew York Supreme Court · 1858
- Nash v. MitchellNew York Court of Appeals · 1877