Messer v. Smyth
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Writ op Entry, on a mortgage of a farm, made by the defendant to the plaintiff. The defendant bought the farm of the plaintiff. At the time of the purchase the defendant was, and ever since has been, a married woman. When the plaintiff conveyed the farm to her, July 30, 1875, she gave him her note for $4,250, part of the price, and the mortgage to secure the note. The court reserved the question, whether the action can be maintained.
1Opinion of the CourtDoe, C. J.
Under Gen. Sts., c. 164, s. 1, the farm became the separate property of the defendant when the title passed to her from the plaintiff. And if her note for part of the price, given when the title passed, was a contract made by her “ in respect to” her separate property, it was valid, and this action can be maintained. Gen. Sts., c. 164, s. 13.
tIn Bailey v. Pearson, 29 N. H. 77, the wife, having separate property, signed a note with her son, apparently as his surety. The note did not appear to have been given in respect to her property. In Shcmnon v. Garmey, 44 N. H. 592, it did not appear that…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Jones v. CrosthwaiteSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Brigham v. WeaverMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1850
- Sykes v. ChadwickSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Ballin v. . DillayeNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- Manhattan Brass & Manufacturing Co. v. ThompsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Penacook Savings Bank v. SanbornSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1881
- People's Trust Co. v. MerrillSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1918