Strom v. Strom

• Decision Date: 29 June 1906
• Citation: 107 N.W. 1047,98 Minn. 427
• Parties: STROM v. STROM.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

98 Minn. 427

107 N.W. 1047

STROM

v.STROM.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

June 29, 1906.

Appeal from District Court, Lyon County; B. F. Webber, Judge.

Action by Mary A. Strom against Magnus M. Strom. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

A married woman cannot, either before or after a divorce, maintain a civil action against her husband for a personal tort committed by him against her during coverture. Nye & Deutsch, for appellant.

John Lind & A. Ueland, for respondent.

START, C. J.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been received by the plaintiff by reason of an assault alleged to have been committed upon her by the defendant on the 11th day of April, 1905. The answer denied the assault, and, as a second defense, alleged that at the time of the alleged assault the plaintiff and the defendant were husband and wife living together as such; and as a third defense it alleged a judgment dissolving the marriage of the parties at the suit of the plaintiff on account of the alleged assault, and awarding to her permanent alimony in the sum of $5,100 which the defendant paid. The plaintiff demurred to the second and third defenses on the ground that the same do not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense. The trial court made its order overruling the demurrer from which the plaintiff appealed.

The sole question for our decision is: Can a wife maintain a civil action against her husband for a personal tort committed by him against her during coverture? It is the contention of the plaintiff that she can by virtue of Gen. St. 1894, § 5530, which reads as follows: ‘That from and after the passage of this act, women shall retain the same legal existence and legal personality after marriage as before marriage, and shall receive the same protection of all her rights as a woman, which her husband does, as a man; and for any injuries sustained to her reputation, person, property, character or any natural right, she shall have the same right to appeal, in her own name alone, to the courts of law or equity, for redress and protection that her husband has to appear in his name alone; provided, this act shall not confer upon the wife a right to vote or hold office, except as is otherwise provided by law.’ This statute gives to a married woman the same right of action in her own name for any injuries sustained to her reputation, person, or property as her husband has in...