History
  • No items yet
midpage
Vance v. Wells & Co.
6 Ala. 737
Ala.
1844
Check Treatment
GOLDTHWAITE, J.

A married woman, in general, can-

not be a party to a promissory note or bill of exchange, so as to charge herself to liability in a court of law. [Chitty on Bills-, 24.] Indeed, it has been held, that during, coverture, she is not capable to contract, although separated from her husband. [Marshall v. Rutter, 8 Term, 545.] In the case of Lee v. Muggeridge, [5 Taunt. 37,]. where a feme was under a moral obligation to pay' a bond executed by her when covert, and she, after the death of her husband, promised to pay it, her executors were held liable on this subsequent promise. But here, there is no moral obliga-tion shown, nor any new consideration to support the subsequent-promise; and as the contract was wholly void by reason of co--verture, the subsequent promise to pay, was without consideran tion, and cannot bind her.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.-

Case Details

Case Name: Vance v. Wells & Co.
Court Name: Supreme Court of Alabama
Date Published: Jun 15, 1844
Citation: 6 Ala. 737
Court Abbreviation: Ala.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.