Leake v. Saunders
Decision Date | 03 July 1935 |
Docket Number | No. 6718.,6718. |
Citation | 84 S.W.2d 993 |
Parties | LEAKE v. SAUNDERS et al. |
Court | Texas Supreme Court |
We adopt the statement of the case contained in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals as follows:
The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the judgment of the trial court and rendered judgment that Powell take nothing. 67 S. W.(2d) 402. It placed its decision upon the ground that there was no consideration to support the renewal notes executed by Mrs. Saunders after the death of her husband.
It seems to be true, as stated in an exhaustive note in 17 A. L. R. beginning at page 1341, that, according to the numerical weight of authority, a contract made by a married woman of the nature of that here involved is absolutely null and void and will not constitute a sufficient consideration to sustain a new executory promise to perform the obligation made by her after her disability has been removed. The cases so holding are by courts of states adhering to the common-law doctrine of marital rights, under which the identity of the wife was merged in the husband. Some courts of high standing in states which also adhere to this common-law doctrine disagree with the numerical majority, and hold that the moral obligation of a widow to perform a contract made by her and her husband during his lifetime for the benefit of the community estate constitutes an adequate consideration to support a promise made by her after the disability of coverture is removed to perform her void contract. See "Minority Doctrine," 17 A. L. R. page 1346; Elliott on Contracts, vol. 1, § 212; 53 L. R. A. page 36.
With this conflict in other jurisdictions we are not now concerned, for the conclusion in each line of decisions is built upon a premise not recognized in this state; namely, that the contract of a married woman not made for a purpose specifically authorized by statute is absolutely null and void. Such a contract is not void in Texas. We are mindful of such cases as Cruger v. McCracken, 87 Tex. 584, 30 S. W. 537; Wallis v. Stuart, 92 Tex. 568, 50 S. W. 567; Trimble v. Miller, 24 Tex. 214, 215; Lane v. Moon, 46 Tex. Civ. App. 625, 103 S. W. 211, and others of similar import. It is recognized that statements made in the opinions in those cases and apparently, in some instances,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Straus v. Shamblin
...which the execution may be levied, that an execution may issue against the property of the wife. It is also held in Leake v. Saunders et al., 126 Tex. 69, 84 S.W.2d 993, that a married woman's contract, which is not made for a purpose specifically authorized by statute, is not void, but mer......
-
Jones v. Wynne
...court incorrectly determined the question of her liability, the order of approval was erroneous only and not void. Leake v. Saunders et al., 126 Tex. 69, 84 S.W.2d 993, and authorities there cited; Cameron v. Morris, 83 Tex. 14, 18 S.W. 422; Speer's Law of Marital Rights, 3d ed. secs. 578-9......
-
Whisenant v. Thompson Bros. Hardware Co.
...as a defense, it is incumbent upon her to plead coverture. Gamel v. City Nat. Bank, Tex.Com.App., 258 S.W. 1043; Leake v. Saunders et al., 126 Tex. 69, 84 S.W.2d 993; Womack v. First Nat. Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 81 S.W.2d 99; 25 Tex.Jur. 402. Conversely, it is likewise established that in a sui......
-
Teas v. Kimball
...Ordinary contracts of married women during coverture in Texas are considered to be voidable rather than void. Leake v. Saunders, 126 Tex. 69, 84 S.W.2d 993. The woman is bound unless she interposes the defense of coverture and the other party is bound unless and until the defense of covertu......