McElfresh v. Kirkendall
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Yam, Burén District Cowrt. Action to recover damages for slanderous words spoken of plaintiff by the defendant, Mary Kirkend all, wife of the defendant, E. B. Kirkendall. The defendant, E. B. Kirkendall, demurred to the petition on the ground that, at the time of the speaking of said words, he was not liable for slanderous words spoken by his wife. The court sustained the demurrer, and rendered judgment for costs in favor of said defendant. Plaintiff appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
It is admitted that, at common law, the husband is liable for slanderous words spohen by his wife. But it is claimed that the acts of the 13th General Assembly, chapter 126, and chapter 167, section 11, change this common-law rule, and exempt the husband from liability. We are clearly of opinion that a fair construction of these statutes does not allow to them any such radical effect.
In the construction of a remedial statute there are three points to be considered; the old law, the mischief, and the remedy. And it is the business of courts so to construe the act as to suppress the mischief…
2Cited by30 opinions
- Feil v. City of Coeur D'AleneIdaho Supreme Court · 1912
- Fire Association of Phila. v. Allis Chalmers Mfg. Co.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 1955
- Heisler v. HeislerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
- Rasmus v. AO Smith CorporationDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1958
- Shelby v. ZieglerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.