Hennies v. Vogel

66 Ill. 401
Illinois Supreme Court·Decided September 15, 1872·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam :

This action was brought by husband and wife for personal injuries to the wife.

This court held in C. B. and Q. R. R. Co. v. Dunn, 52 Ill. 260, that a right of action arising by reason of personal injuries received by a married woman was her separate property, and to recover damages for such injuries she must sue alone. This doctrine was repeated in Hayner et al. v. Smith et al. 63 Ill. 430.

For any loss to the husband by reason of his wife’s disabilities so occasioned, he has his separate remedy.

The record shows the husband had no cause of action.

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Jicdgment reversed.

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

Hennies v. Vogel, 66 Ill. 401 (Ill. 1872).

66 Ill. 401 (Hennies v. Vogel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Blair v. Bloomington & Normal Railway, Electric & Heating Co.
130 Ill. App. 400 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1906)
Knights Templar Masons' Life Indemnity Co. v. Gravett
49 Ill. App. 252 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1893)
City of Rock Island v. Deis
38 Ill. App. 409 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1890)
Harris v. Brain
33 Ill. App. 510 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1889)
Hilliard v. Beattie
59 N.H. 462 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1879)
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Dickson
67 Ill. 122 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1873)