Case ID: la-ann_3/html/0188-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Slidlll, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Perry v. Thompson.
    A due bill executed by a married woman, without tbe authorization of her husband, will not be binding on ber, where the .consideration for which it was given is not shown to have inured to her benefit.
    from the District Court of Carroll, Curry, J.
    
      Stacy and Sparrow, for the appellant.
    
      Be-miss and Thomas, for the defendant.
   The judgment of the court was pronounced by

Slidlll, J.

The plaintiff is the holder, by transfer long after maturity, of a due bill signed by the defendant, a married woman, without the authorization 'of her husband. Under the evidence, we are not satisfied that the defendant received for the note, such a consideration inuring to her benefit, as would authorize us to hold her bound by this contract.. .

Judgment affirmed.