McDermott Bros. v. Garland

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

McDermott Bros. v. Garland

12 D.C. 496

District of Columbia Court of Appeals·Decided May 25, 1882·No. No. 21,351·Published

Opinion

Chief Justice Cartter,

delivering the opinion of the court* said :

The rule laid down in the case of Schneider & Son vs. Garland, decided at the last term of this court must be held to apply here. That was even a much stronger case than this but the court found that the defendant, a married woman, was not liable in an action at law. This rule being applied it follows that the judgment below must be reversed.

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

Chief Justice Cartter,

delivering the opinion of the court* said :

The rule laid down in the case of Schneider & Son vs. Garland, decided at the last term of this court must be held to apply here. That was even a much stronger case than this but the court found that the defendant, a married woman, was not liable in an action at law. This rule being applied it follows that the judgment below must be reversed.

McDermott Bros. v. Garland, 12 D.C. 496 (D.C. 1882).

Pincite

12 D.C. 496 (McDermott Bros. v. Garland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.