Hunt v. Eaton

CourtSupreme Court of Michigan
Writing for the CourtCHAMPLIN
Citation55 Mich. 362,21 N.W. 429
Decision Date19 November 1884
PartiesHUNT v. EATON.

55 Mich. 362
21 N.W. 429

HUNT
v.
EATON.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

Filed November 19, 1884.


Error to the superior court of Detroit.

[21 N.W. 429]

Griffin & Warner, for plaintiff.

Edgar Weeks and W.B. Jackson, for defendant, appellant.


CHAMPLIN, J.

In 1880 Alonzo Eaton and Ellen V. Eaton were married. At this time Mr. Eaton was in straightened circumstances, and Mrs. Eaton had in her hands something like $5,000, which belonged to her daughter, by a former marriage. At Mr. Eaton's request she loaned him from time to time sums of money amounting in the aggregate to $600, and also paid a number of bills for household expenses and wearing apparel, the whole amounting at the time of the commencement of this suit, including the money loaned, to $3,322.58. She took no written evidences from him of any agreement in reference to these loans and advances, but the next day after their marriage, or within 10 days after the nuptials were celebrated, in the privacy of their chamber, and with no one else present, he agreed and promised his

[21 N.W. 430]

wife that if she would make advancements of money to take care of the house, and whatever money she should let him have he would pay her back every dollar when he sold a certain homestead which he owned, and which was incumbered by a mortgage. Mr. Eaton not having sold the homestead, and having repudiated any liability to his wife, she assigned her claims against her husband to the plaintiff, who has brought this suit. Mr. and Mrs. Eaton, at the time of the trial, were living together as husband and wife.

To prove his case, the plaintiff introduced as a witness Mrs. Eaton, the wife of defendant. The defendant objected to her testifying. The plaintiff's counsel proposed to prove by the witness the facts above narrated; and thereupon the counsel for defendant insisted upon his objection, for the reason that the wife is not a competent witness to testify against her husband in an action brought in her own behalf, nor in an action where the subject-matter of the suit is brought by her assignee. The judge of the superior court of Detroit overruled the objection, and permitted the witness to testify fully as to what occurred between the defendant and witness relative to the agreement as to advances and repayments, not made in the presence of other persons, and while they were husband and wife. To this the defendant excepted, and it constitutes the main ground of error relied upon for a reversal of the judgment.

Whether this testimony was competent depends upon the construction to be given to section 7546, How.St., which reads as follows: “A husband shall not be examined as a witness for or against his wife without her consent, nor...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • People v. Hamacher, Docket No. 81202
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • March 30, 1989
    ...statute controls." People v. Love, 425 Mich. 691, 699, 391 N.W.2d 738 (1986) (opinion of Cavanagh, J.). We have considered Hunt v. Eaton, 55 Mich. 362, 366, 21 N.W. 429 (1884), discussed in the dissenting opinion, 11 where this Court mentioned a number of considerations in concluding that t......
  • Eaton v. Eaton
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • January 12, 1888
    ...judgment was rendered therein in favor of Hunt for $3,361.48, which judgment was subsequently affirmed in this court. See Hunt v. Eaton, 55 Mich. 362, 21 N.W. 429. On the first day of July, 1884, execution upon said judgment was levied upon said lot No. 9, on Parsons street. At the time of ......
2 cases
  • People v. Hamacher, Docket No. 81202
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • March 30, 1989
    ...statute controls." People v. Love, 425 Mich. 691, 699, 391 N.W.2d 738 (1986) (opinion of Cavanagh, J.). We have considered Hunt v. Eaton, 55 Mich. 362, 366, 21 N.W. 429 (1884), discussed in the dissenting opinion, 11 where this Court mentioned a number of considerations in concluding that t......
  • Eaton v. Eaton
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • January 12, 1888
    ...judgment was rendered therein in favor of Hunt for $3,361.48, which judgment was subsequently affirmed in this court. See Hunt v. Eaton, 55 Mich. 362, 21 N.W. 429. On the first day of July, 1884, execution upon said judgment was levied upon said lot No. 9, on Parsons street. At the time of ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT