Opinion
July Term, 1903.
Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide event. Held, that the complaint states a cause of action against the defendant for enticing away the plaintiff's husband and enticing him to permanently desert her; but whether or not the evidence was sufficient to establish such alleged cause of action was a question of fact for the jury, and that the alleged cause of action was not barred by the Statute of Limitations. All concurred.