Carlton v. Carlton

CourtMaine Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtWALTON, J.
CitationCarlton v. Carlton, 72 Me. 115 (Me. 1881)
Decision Date05 March 1881
PartiesJENETTE CARLTON v. JOSEPH CARLTON.

ON EXCEPTIONS from superior court, Kennebec.

Assumpsit for personal services of plaintiff, performed prior to the marriage of the plaintiff with defendant.

Action commenced subsequent to a divorce decreed upon libel of the wife. Verdict for plaintiff.

The presiding judge instructed the jury, that " if any just claim existed in favor of this plaintiff prior to the date of this marriage, if she then had any right to maintain an action to recover for her services for which she has not been paid, at most the marriage only suspended the remedy or right of action. After the bands of matrimony were dissolved the disability arising from the marital relations necessarily ceased, the right which she had before marriage was revived and this action can be maintained now, precisely as it might have been maintained before the marriage was contracted." To this instruction the defendant excepted.

Pillsbury and Potter, for the plaintiff, cited Webster v. Webster, 58 Me. 139; Blake v. Blake, 64 Me. 177; Tunks v. Grover, 57 Me. 586.

S. and L. Titcomb, for the defendant.

Marriage is a release at law of all contracts existing between husband and wife before marriage. Boatwight v. Wingate, Treadw. (S. C.) 521; Smiley v. Smiley, 18 Ohio St 543; Abbott v. Winchester, 105 Mass. 115.

Revised Statutes, c. 61, § 3 only authorizes a married woman to maintain an action against a person other than her husband. Crowther v. Crowther, 55 Me. 358; see Abbott v. Abbott, 67 Me. 306; Pittman v. Pittman, 4 Oreg. 298.

WALTON, J.

The question is whether a woman who is divorced can maintain an action against her former husband for personal services performed for him before their marriage. We think she can " A woman, having property, is not deprived of any part of it by her marriage." Such is the statute law of this State. R. S., c. 61, § 2. The word " property" includes choses in action as well as choses in possession. It includes money due as well as money possessed. It includes money due for personal services as well as money due for any thing else. In its broadest sense it includes every thing which goes to make up one's wealth or estate. We cannot doubt that this is the sense in which it is used in this statute. It follows, therefore, that a woman, by her marriage, can no more be deprived of money due to her than she can of money actually possessed by her, of money due...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
11 cases
  • Wiser v. Lawler
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • November 9, 1900
    ... ... property. King v. Gotz, 70 Cal. 240, 11 P. 656. It ... is "any thing that goes to make up one's wealth or ... estate." Carlton v. Carlton, 72 Me. 115, 39 Am ... Rep. 307 ... The ... word "belonging" does not necessarily indicate ... title. As a verb it is ... ...
  • Bachrach v. Nelson
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • October 22, 1932
    ...135 Ill. 545, 26 N. E. 651,12 L. R. A. 247. ‘Property’ includes everything which goes to make up one's wealth or estate. Carlton v. Carlton, 72 Me. 115, 39 Am. Rep. 307. Salary of an office is property. Greene v. Knox, supra; Hibbard v. State, supra. A tax upon the income of property is in ......
  • Eliasberg Bros. Mercantile Co. v. Grimes
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • April 24, 1920
    ... ... Phrases, pp. 5693-5699. In this sense "property" ... includes everything which goes to make up one's wealth or ... estate. Carlton v. Carlton, 72 Me. 115, 116, 39 ... Am.Rep. 307. In Greene v. Knox, 175 N.Y. 432, 67 ... N.E. 910, it was held that the salary of an office is ... ...
  • Taylor v. Taylor
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • August 17, 1909
    ...after divorce, may recover on promissory notes given her by the husband during coverture. Sustaining the same principle: Carlton v. Carlton, 72 Me. 115, 39 Am.Rep. 307; Flattery v. Flattery, 91 Pa. 474. Much of apparent conflict among the cases bearing on the question is occasioned either b......
  • Get Started for Free