Klotz v. Butler
Mississippi Supreme Court
Error to the Circuit Court of Copiah County. Hon. S. S. Cali-ioon, Judge. The case is stated in the opinion of the court. The testimony shows that the supplies were furnished and used on the wife’s plantation. The husband is the wife’s agent, appointed by the statute, by which alone his powers and authority to bind the wife are to be measured.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Copiah County. Hon. S. S. Cali-ioon, Judge. The case is stated in the opinion of the court. The testimony shows that the supplies were furnished and used on the wife’s plantation. The husband is the wife’s agent, appointed by the statute, by which alone his powers and authority to bind the wife are to be measured. In Glopton v. MatJieny, 48 Miss. 385, this court, in defining the limit of the husband’s authority as statutory agent of the wife, clearly held that he ivas empowered to do any thing, in and about contracting for plantation supplies. It was distinctly…
1Opinion of the CourtChalmers, J.
The action was against the wife, for plantation supplies bought by the husband, the latter being joined in the suit, for conformity.
Plaintiff counted, in the declaration, upon a note executed by the husband, and upon an account stated.
In support of the second count, he proved that the supplies furnished were purchased for and used upon the wife’s plantation ; that at the end of the year a settlement took place between himself and the husband; and that the balance was ascertained and agreed upon, and the note of the husband taken for the amount due. He had no dealings or conversation with the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Thallhimer v. BrinckerhoffNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Clopton v. MathenyMississippi Supreme Court · 1873
- Cook v. LigonMississippi Supreme Court · 1877
- Burnham v. EllisSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1855
3Cited by2 opinions
- Dean v. BoydMississippi Supreme Court · 1905
- Hartline v. AllenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922