Sisco v. Cheeney

1 Wright 9, 1 Ohio Ch. 9
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 15, 1831·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

WRIGHT, J.

If the tort complained of were by the husband, and wif & jointly, suit should be against the husband alone, for the law intends the whole his act. 2 Com. Dig. 111. If the action [10]*10be against husband and wife jointly for a tort they could not jointly commit, or against the husband alone for the separate act of the wife, and the objection appear on the face of the pleadings, tha 10] *defendant may demur, move in arrest of judgment, or bring his writ of error. 2 Com. Dig. 111. 1 Ch. Pl. 80. So if the action be joint, and the husband he found not guilty, the action fails. Brownl. 209, Yelv. 106. If a verdict is taken, therefore, what good would result to the plaintiff, if we must arrest the judgment upon it?

Verdict and judgment for the defendant.

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

Sisco v. Cheeney, 1 Wright 9, 1 Ohio Ch. 9 (Ohio 1831).

1 Wright 9 (Sisco v. Cheeney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

O'Rourke v. Sherwin
27 A. 43 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1893)
Oyster v. Oyster
100 Pa. 538 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1882)
Stone v. McMullen
1 Pennyp. 108 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1881)
Huber's Appeal
80 Pa. 348 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1876)
Robins v. Quinliven
79 Pa. 333 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1875)
Yarnall's Appeal
70 Pa. 335 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1872)
Dodson v. Ball
60 Pa. 492 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1869)
Powell v. Board of Domestic Missions
49 Pa. 46 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1865)
Unger v. Unger
1 Pears. 233 (Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas, 1863)