Waters v. Bean
Supreme Court of Georgia
Assumpsit, &c. in Gordon Superior Court. Decision by Judge John H. Lumpkin, September Term, 1854. This was an action by Jesse A. Bean, against Nancy Waters, upon a note. It appeared that the note was given while the maker was a feme covert '. She was subsequently declared a free dealer, by Act’ of the Legislature; and after that time, promised to pay the nóte. The question was submitted to the Court below, upon these facts, whether Bean was entitled to recover.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, &c. in Gordon Superior Court. Decision by Judge John H. Lumpkin, September Term, 1854. This was an action by Jesse A. Bean, against Nancy Waters, upon a note. It appeared that the note was given while the maker was a feme covert '. She was subsequently declared a free dealer, by Act’ of the Legislature; and after that time, promised to pay the nóte. The question was submitted to the Court below, upon these facts, whether Bean was entitled to recover. The Court held that he was; and this decision is assigned as error, by Mrs. Nancy Waters.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Lumpkin, J.
delivering the opinion.
[1.] The only question which arises upon this record, and which has been argued with such commendable zeal and ingenuity, pro and con, by our young brethren, Wofford and Johnson, is whether, where a feme is sued on a promissory note, made by her while feme covert, and she pleads her coverture in bar, it is a good replication, that she promised to pay the imteT^fter she had been*madc a free dealer, by Act of the Legislature, no new consideration or previous moral obligation being shown, to support the contract ?
It is laid down as a general rule,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Lyell v. WalbachCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1910
- Lyell v. WalbachBaltimore City Superior Court · 1910