21 Mich. 215 | Mich. | 1870
The only question in this case is, whether an- action of trespass for an assault and battery committed upon a wife, can be maintained by her during coverture without joining the husband as co-plaintiff.
In such a case, therefore, the action, though it could not be brought in the name of the wife alone, yet was in her right to the same extent, and for the same reason, as in .actions for the recovery of mere debts and other choses in action which became due to her before marriage.
By the first section of our statute in reference to “the rights of married women” (Comp. L., § 3292), “The real and personal estate of every female acquired before marriage, and all property real and personal to which she may afterwards become entitled by gift, grant, inheritance, devise ■or in any other manner, shall be and remain the estate and property of such female, and shall not be liable for the debts, obligations, and engagements of her husband, and may be contracted, sold, transferred, mortgaged, conveyed, devised or bequeathed by her in the same manner ■and" with the like effect as if she were unmarried.”
"We think within the fair intention of this section, the
We think, therefore, the Circuit Court erred in holding that the present action could not he sustained in the name of the wife alone.
The judgment must be reversed with costs, and a new trial awarded.