Harvey v. Johnson

4 Citing cases

  1. King v. Gates

    57 S.E.2d 765 (N.C. 1950)   Cited 4 times

    The appeal by defendant Calder from the judgment below overruling his demurrer to the complaint presents for determination the question whether now in this jurisdiction a wife may maintain an action for damages for injuries to her person caused by the negligence of her husband. Prior to 1868 in North Carolina a married woman was not sui juris and was incapable of maintaining an action without the joinder of her husband (Roberts v. Roberts, 185 N.C. 566, 118 S.E. 9; Harvey v. Johnson, 133 N.C. 352, 45 S.E. 644), but in that year by the enactment of the Code of Civil Procedure, section 56, the General Assembly prescribed an exception to this procedural rule, as follows: "When a married woman is a party, her husband must be joined with her, except that (1) when the action concerns her separate property she may sue alone; (2) when the action is between herself and her husband, she may sue or be sued alone." This statute was later codified as C.S. 454.

  2. Grocery Co. v. Bails

    98 S.E. 768 (N.C. 1919)   Cited 10 times
    In Grocery Co. v. Bails, 177 N.C. 298, it was held that a violation of a similar statute, C. S., 3292, did not affect a married woman's right to her personal property exemptions.

    It was held, even prior to the Martin Act of 1911, that on a judgment against the wife she is entitled to her personal property exemption. Harvey v. Johnson, 133 N.C. 353. There are other parts of that decision which do not obtain since the passage of the "Martin Act."

  3. Stephens v. Hicks

    156 N.C. 239 (N.C. 1911)   Cited 22 times
    In Stephens, the court concluded that one who performs the work of supervisor was not entitled to a mechanic's lien for such services.

    In Finger v. Hunter we held that the act of 1901, ch. 617 (Revisal, sec. 2016), giving a laborer's lien on the real property of a married woman for work done on her building and for material furnished, was constitutional and valid, and in Ball v. Paquin we held that the plaintiff acquired a lien for work done and material furnished for the construction of a dwelling on a married woman's land, under a written contract with her and her husband, which was duly proved, as to both, with her privy examination. In both cases there were liens, while in this case there is none, and it is therefore governed by Flaum v. Wallace, 103 N.C. 296; Weir v. Page, 109 N.C. 220; Thompson v. Taylor, 110 N.C. 70; Weathers v. Borders, 124 N.C. 610; Harvey v. Johnson, 133 N.C. 353, and the recent case of Kearney v. Vann, 154 N.C. 311, in which Justice Allen learnedly considers the question. The contract in this case was made before the passage of the act of 1911, ch. 109, and is, therefore, not governed by it.

  4. Mercantile Nat'l Bank v. Benbow

    150 N.C. 781 (N.C. 1909)   Cited 7 times

    This subject has been so much discussed in decisions of this Court that to review them again is unnecessary and unprofitable. Both sides of the controversy are presented fully in the opinion of the Court by Mr. Justice Walker and in the dissenting opinion of the Chief Justice in Harvey v. Johnson, 133 N.C. 353. There is no pretense of any express or implied charge in the contract sued on upon the personal estate of the feme defendant which can be enforced by a court of equity.