Curry v. Allen

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Curry v. Allen

14 R.I. 343, 1884 R.I. LEXIS 9

DecidedJanuary 19, 1884

StatusPublished

This text of 14 R.I. 343 (Curry v. Allen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Curry v. Allen, 14 R.I. 343, 1884 R.I. LEXIS 9 (R.I. 1884).

Pincite

Opinion

Dübfee, C. J.

A husband is liable to be sued along with his wife for her torts, even though they are committed by her apart from him and without his knowledge, direction, or consent. Head v. Briscoe, 5 Carr. & P. 484. But he is not liable to suit alone, for her torts so committed are not his in contemplation of law, but hers; and he is sued with her not because they are imputed to him, but because she cannot, while covert, be sued alone. As soon as her coverture terminates, either by death or divorce, neither he nor his estate is liable; but she, if living, can be sued without him. If pending suit against both she dies, the suit abates; whereas if he dies it may be prosecuted to judgment against her alone. 2 Bishop Law of Married Women, §§ 254, 255; Wright v. Leonard, 11 C. B. N. S. 258, 266; Capel v. Powell, 17 C. B. N. S. 743, 745. It was error, therefore, to enter judgment against the petitioner; but inasmuch as judgment could not be rendered against both him and her, the wife never having been served, Versepuy v. Watson, 12 R. I. 342, it should not have been rendered against either. The petition is meritori *344 ous, and, therefore, for the reason assigned in it, supported as it is by affidavit, we think it should be granted.

Charles Pi. Page, for petitioner. Albert D. Bean, contra.

Petition granted.

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

Dübfee, C. J.

A husband is liable to be sued along with his wife for her torts, even though they are committed by her apart from him and without his knowledge, direction, or consent. Head v. Briscoe, 5 Carr. & P. 484. But he is not liable to suit alone, for her torts so committed are not his in contemplation of law, but hers; and he is sued with her not because they are imputed to him, but because she cannot, while covert, be sued alone. As soon as her coverture terminates, either by death or divorce, neither he nor his estate is liable; but she, if living, can be sued without him. If pending suit against both she dies, the suit abates; whereas if he dies it may be prosecuted to judgment against her alone. 2 Bishop Law of Married Women, §§ 254, 255; Wright v. Leonard, 11 C. B. N. S. 258, 266; Capel v. Powell, 17 C. B. N. S. 743, 745. It was error, therefore, to enter judgment against the petitioner; but inasmuch as judgment could not be rendered against both him and her, the wife never having been served, Versepuy v. Watson, 12 R. I. 342, it should not have been rendered against either. The petition is meritori *344 ous, and, therefore, for the reason assigned in it, supported as it is by affidavit, we think it should be granted.

Charles Pi. Page, for petitioner. Albert D. Bean, contra.

Petition granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 R.I. 343, 1884 R.I. LEXIS 9, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curry-v-allen-ri-1884.