Childress v. Mann & Co.

33 Ala. 206
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJune 15, 1858
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 33 Ala. 206 (Childress v. Mann & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Childress v. Mann & Co., 33 Ala. 206 (Ala. 1858).

Opinion

WALKER, J.

The complaint in this case does not show a substantial cause of action against the female appellant; consequently, the judgment must be reversed, notwithstanding it was rendered upon a default, and there was no objection in the court below.—Blount v. McNeill, 29 Ala. Rep. 473; Stewart v. Goode & Ulrick, 29 Ala. Rep. 476.

[2.] The marginal description of the parties states, that the female plaintiff'is the wife of her co-plaintiff. The first count of the complaint is upon an account. A married woman cannot contract an account, during her coverture, for which she can be personally proceeded against. Marquis and Wife v. Gibson, 29 Ala. 668.

[3.] The second count is for goods, wares and merchandise, sold to the defendants, which were articles of comfort and support of the household, suitable to the degree and condition in life of the family of the defendants. No cause of action can exist against a married woman, for such articles as are described in the complaint, supplied during the coverture, unless she has a separate estate.—Code, § 1987; Durden and Wife v. [208]*208McWilliams & Smith, 31 Ala. R. 438. The second count does not aver, that the married woman who is a defendant had any separate estate, and, therefore, fails to show a substantial cause of action against her.

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the cause remanded.

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

Related

Nelson v. Boe
148 So. 311 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1933)
Griffin v. Fowler
82 So. 653 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1919)
Bryant v. Southern Railway Co.
137 Ala. 488 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1902)
Linam v. Jones
134 Ala. 570 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1901)
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Williams
113 Ala. 402 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1896)
Bender v. Meyer & Co.
55 Ala. 576 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1876)
McDonald v. Mobile Life Insurance
56 Ala. 468 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1876)
Janney v. Buell
55 Ala. 408 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1876)
Pippin v. Jones & Co.
52 Ala. 161 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1875)
Kelly v. Moore
51 Ala. 364 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1874)
Foster v. State
39 Ala. 229 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1864)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
33 Ala. 206, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/childress-v-mann-co-ala-1858.