Bevill v. Cox

107 N.C. 175
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedSeptember 15, 1890
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 107 N.C. 175 (Bevill v. Cox) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bevill v. Cox, 107 N.C. 175 (N.C. 1890).

Opinion

Clark, J.:

If the testatrix, while a feme sole, had contracted with plaintiff for services for a definite period, the marriage of the testatrix before the expiration of such time would not impair the obligation of the antenuptial contract, and plaintiff could have recovered in an action before a magistrate compensation (if not more than $200) for the whole period, although part of the services were rendered after marriage. The Code, § 1823; Hodges v. Hill, 105 N. C., 130. But when the contract is for no specified time, the obligation to pay arises as the services are rendered. Marriage having changed the status of the employer, her liability, in such case, for services rendered after marriage, depends upon whether expressly, or by necessary implication, she charged her separate estate with payment for such services. Farthing v. Shields, 106 N. C., 289. And that can only be determined in an action brought in the Superior Court. Dougherty v. Sprinkle, 88 N. C., 300.

Per Curiam, ■ Error.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Wilson Cotton Mills v. Randleman Cotton Mills
21 S.E. 431 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
107 N.C. 175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bevill-v-cox-nc-1890.