Kelly v. Williams

Decision Date27 March 1933
Docket Number7019.
Citation21 P.2d 58,94 Mont. 19
PartiesKELLY v. WILLIAMS.
CourtMontana Supreme Court

Appeal from District Court, Silver Bow County; Frank L. Riley, Judge.

Action by Kate Kelly against Joseph H. Williams, as administrator of the estate of J. D. Kelly, deceased, who was substituted for original defendant. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

Reversed and remanded, with directions.

Freeman, Thelen & Freeman, of Great Falls, for appellant.

N. A. Rotering, of Butte, for respondent.

CALLAWAY, Chief Justice.

This action, brought by the plaintiff against her husband, is grounded upon an alleged tort caused by her husband in negligently operating an automobile in which she was riding. During the pendency of the action the husband died, and Williams, the administrator of his estate, was substituted as party defendant. The plaintiff received judgment, from which the defendant appealed.

The case is ruled directly by the decision of this court in Conley v. Conley, 92 Mont. 425, 15 P.2d 922, wherein it was held that the Montana Married Women's Act does not authorize a married woman to sue her husband for a personal tort. All the points presented to support the judgment here were decided adversely to plaintiff's arguments in the Conley Case. It is worthy of remark that the Legislature seems satisfied with the statutory construction announced in that case, which was decided October 26, 1932. During its recent session a bill designed to enlarge the rights of the spouses to sue one another, including actions for personal torts, did not receive favorable action even in the house in which it originated.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded to the district court of Silver Bow county, with direction to dismiss the action.

ANGSTMAN, MATTHEWS, STEWART, and ANDERSON, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Courtney v. Courtney
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • 25 Octubre 1938
    ...with her husband or next friend (Henneger v. Lomas, 145 Ind. 287, 44 N.E. 462, 32 L.R.A. 848; Hobbs v. Hobbs, 70 Me. 381; Kelly v. Williams, 94 Mont. 19, 21 P.2d 58; Perlman v. Brooklyn City Ry. Co., 117 Misc. 353, N.Y.S. 891, affirmed, 202 A.D. 822, 194 N.Y.S. 971, and Thompson v. Thompson......
  • Miller v. Fallon County
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • 5 Agosto 1986
    ...refused to abolish the doctrine of interspousal tort immunity. Conley v. Conley (1932), 92 Mont. 425, 15 P.2d 922; Kelly v. Williams (1933), 94 Mont. 19, 21 P.2d 58; State ex rel. Angvall v. District Court (1968), 151 Mont. 483, 444 P.2d 370; and State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. Lea......
  • Primmer v. Carter County
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • 21 Abril 1933
    ... ... assembled, and therefore he had no valid claim to assign to ... the plaintiff, citing Williams v. Board of County ... Commissioners, 28 Mont. 360, 72 P. 755, and certain ... other decisions having little application. On this phase of ... the ... ...
  • State v. Whitmore
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • 17 Abril 1933

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