Thresher v. Barry

37 A. 1064, 69 Conn. 470, 1897 Conn. LEXIS 77
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedJuly 13, 1897
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 37 A. 1064 (Thresher v. Barry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Thresher v. Barry, 37 A. 1064, 69 Conn. 470, 1897 Conn. LEXIS 77 (Colo. 1897).

Opinion

Baldwin, J.

It is immaterial whether the mortgage security given by the defendant was or was not valid in favor of the mortgagee. Her property was afterwards taken on attachment against her husband, and she had the right to make a contract for professional assistance in securing its release, and for this purpose to pledge her personal credit. One way of regaining its possession would be to contest the cause of action of the attaching creditor. If he had none, it might well be that a judgment against him could be obtained in the attachment suit with less of delay or expense than would be incident to a new action brought for a direct vindication of her rights. She preferred this method of redress, and it proved successful. It is found that she owned what, by her husband’s acts, had become in law her separate estate. Jennings v. Davis, 31 Conn. 134. Her contract with the plaintiff was therefore sufficient to authorize this action and support the judgment. General Statutes, §§ 984, 987.

There is no error.

In this opinion the other judges concurred.

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

Related

Nystrom v. Barker
91 A. 649 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1914)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
37 A. 1064, 69 Conn. 470, 1897 Conn. LEXIS 77, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thresher-v-barry-conn-1897.