Spies v. Accessory Transit Co.

5 Duer 662
CourtThe Superior Court of New York City
DecidedApril 26, 1856
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 5 Duer 662 (Spies v. Accessory Transit Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Spies v. Accessory Transit Co., 5 Duer 662 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1856).

Opinion

Bosworth, J.

The demurrer must be overruled. The husband need not be joined with the wife, when the action concerns her separate property. (Code, § 114.) Whether the plaintiff is a citizen of California or of New York, is of no consequence, so far as concerns the remedies and the forms of proceedings, when she prosecutes in the courts of this state. The demurrer admits the truth of the allegation, that the baggage was her separate property, and the court does not know that a California wife may not have a separate estate. The legal presumption is, that she may.

If the defendant has a right to be informed, by the complaint, of the particular facts which constitute the baggage her separate property, his remedy is by motion under § 160 of the Code. A demurrer will not reach such a defect, as the complaint is good in substance.

The defendant may answer, on paying the costs of the demurrer.

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

Related

Nininger v. Board of County Commissioners
10 Minn. 133 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1865)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
5 Duer 662, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spies-v-accessory-transit-co-nysuperctnyc-1856.