Van Maren v. Johnson
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Sixth District. While the jury were being empanneled, the attorney of defendant, Emily, suggested that she had married Johnson since issue joined.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Sixth District. While the jury were being empanneled, the attorney of defendant, Emily, suggested that she had married Johnson since issue joined. Accordingly an order was entered thus: “ On motion of counsel for plaintiffs, and by consent in open Court of counsel for defendant, ordered that Levi Johnson, the husband of defendant, be and he is hereby made a party defendant to this cause, when said defendant comes and enters his appearance and files his answer in said cause.” Then appears this entry: “ Whereupon, by consent of parties had in open Court, the complaint in said…
1Opinion of the CourtField, C. J.
Cope, J. concurring.
This is an action brought for services rendered by the plaintiff Constantina, previous to her marriage with Van Maren, to the defendant Emily, previous to the latter’s marriage with Johnson. The intermarriage of the plaintiffs transpired before the institution of the action, and the intermarriage of the defendants during its pendency.
We are clear that the action is rightfully brought in the name of the plaintiffs. Though the proceeds, which may be received from the judgment, will constitute the separate property of the wife, yet the control and management of the same will…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Guice v. LawrenceSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1847
3Cited by62 opinions
- Beals ex rel. Walker v. AresNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1919
- Spreckels v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Spreckels v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Blethen v. Pacific Mutual Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- De Godey v. GodeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.