Sturmfelsz v. Frickey
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from the Baltimore City Court. This was au action brought by the appellant against the appellees, husband and wife, to recover for money which he had expended at their request, in payment of mechanics’ liens and other claims resting upon the property of the wife.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Baltimore City Court. This was au action brought by the appellant against the appellees, husband and wife, to recover for money which he had expended at their request, in payment of mechanics’ liens and other claims resting upon the property of the wife. Exception. —At the trial of this cause the plaintiff proved that he expended the sum of $2,685 at the-request of both defendants, in the year 1871, in payment of mechanics’ liens and other' claims upon the property of the appellee, Rosina Frickey > No. 76 Ramsey street, in the City of Baltimore, upon promise of repayment to…
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.
The Act of 1872, cha]). 270, provides:
“That any married woman maybe sued jointly with her husband, in any of the Courts of this State, or before any Justice of the Peace, on any note, bill of exchange, single bill, bond, contract or 'agreement, which she may have executed jointly with her husband.”
The sole question in this case, is whether under the provisions of this Act, an action at lato will lie against a husband and toife, upon their mere verbal agreement to repay money expended by the plaintiff in the payment of mechanics’ liens and other claims, resting upon the property of the wife.…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Davis v. CarrollCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1889
- Harvard Publishing Co. v. BenjaminCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1896
- Dailey v. DaileyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1900
- Maulsby v. ByersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1887
- Consolidated Cases of Ehrmann v. HendrickBaltimore City Superior Court · 1928