Farrell v. Farrell

108 A. 648, 118 Me. 441, 1920 Me. LEXIS 3
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided January 20, 1920·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Philbrook, J.

This is an action brought by a married woman against the father and mother of her husband alleging alienation of the affections of the husband. The father presented a motion to dismiss as to him on the ground that neither under authority of common law nor statute could such an action by a married woman be maintained against a male defendant. The motion was granted and exceptions were allowed to the plaintiff. The ruling was correct. R,. S., Chap. 66, Sec. 7. Prior to the enactment of this statute a married woman could not maintain such an action and it is only to the extent of enlarged powers and rights given by this statute that she may now bring her action against a female defendant. The statute being in derogation of the common law must be strictly construed.

Exceptions overruled.

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

Farrell v. Farrell, 108 A. 648, 118 Me. 441, 1920 Me. LEXIS 3 (Me. 1920).

108 A. 648 (Farrell v. Farrell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cedar Beach v. Abrahamson
Maine Superior, 2014
McCollister v. McCollister
138 A. 472 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1927)