Legal Opinion

Vliet v. Eastburn

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 15, 1899PublishedCited by 1 opinion

On case certified from the Circuit Court of the county of Middlesex, as follows: “A verdict for the plaintiff in the above-stated cause involves a finding of the following matters of fact, viz.: On November 14th, 1896, the defendants, husband and wife, /made their promissory note (the wife signing first) to the ■order of Charles T. Cowenhoven for $2,480, payable in four unpnths, and delivered the same to him on the understanding ■that he was to use the same as collateral for…

Read the full summary

On case certified from the Circuit Court of the county of Middlesex, as follows: “A verdict for the plaintiff in the above-stated cause involves a finding of the following matters of fact, viz.: On November 14th, 1896, the defendants, husband and wife, /made their promissory note (the wife signing first) to the ■order of Charles T. Cowenhoven for $2,480, payable in four unpnths, and delivered the same to him on the understanding ■that he was to use the same as collateral for a loan. Cowen-Iioven gave in exchange his promissory note to the order of ■Isabella Eastburn for a like amount and…

1Opinion of the Court

*452The opinion of the court was delivered by

Collins, J.

As, at common law, a married woman could make no contract legally enforceable, her promissory note was altogether void. Ban. Neg. Inst., § 240; 4 Am. & Eng, Encycl. L. 348. The present enabling act reads as follows:

“That any married woman shall, after the passing of this act, have the right to bind herself by contract with any person in the same manner and to the same extent as though she were unmarried, which contract shall be legal and obligatory, and may be enforced at law or in equity, by or against such married woman, in her own name,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Williams v. BanksCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1857
  2. First National Bank v. DohmSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1890
  3. Messmore v. MeyerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1893

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hillsdale Nat. Bank v. SansoneNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1951

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API