Crook v. Henry
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from tlie Circuit Court for Ternon County. Replevin. Defendant claimed nnder a sale made to Mm by Mrs. Crook, who was then plaintiff’s wife, but had since been divorced from Mm. Mrs. Crook was sworn as a witness for the defense, but the court refused to allow her to testify whether-she was authorized by her husband to sell the property, or whether he assented to the sale, or what disposition was made óf the money received by her for the property.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from tlie Circuit Court for Ternon County. Replevin. Defendant claimed nnder a sale made to Mm by Mrs. Crook, who was then plaintiff’s wife, but had since been divorced from Mm. Mrs. Crook was sworn as a witness for the defense, but the court refused to allow her to testify whether-she was authorized by her husband to sell the property, or whether he assented to the sale, or what disposition was made óf the money received by her for the property. Verdict for the plaintiff; new trial denied; and defendant appealed from a judgment on the verdict. cited Dickerman v. Graves, 6 Cush. 308;…
1Opinion of the CourtCole, J.
Was the defendant entitled to prove by Mrs. Crook that she was authorized by her husband to sell the property in controversy; or that he assented to the sale made by her ? This is the point principally discussed upon the argument, and it must be confessed that the rule excluding her testimony is sustained by high authority. But, nevertheless, under the circumstances, we are inclined to hold that the evidence was admissible.
The action was to recover the possession of a cow, five pigs, a cook stove and some other articles of household property, worth about $66. It appeárs that the plaintiff…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Gordon, Rankin & Co. v. TweedySupreme Court of Alabama · 1881
- Sexton v. SextonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- Bigelow v. SicklesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
- Brown v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899