Ferguson v. Smith
Ferguson against Smith and others
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
The Chancellor.
The general rule is, that the service of a subpoena against husband and wife on the husband alone, is a good service on both, and the reason is, that the husband and wife are one person in law, and the husband is bound to answer for both. ( Wyatt’s Pr. Reg. 402, 403. Gilbert’s For. Rom. 41, 42. 1 Harris. Ch. Practice, 207.) But where the plaintiff is seeking relief out of the separate estate of the wife, it has been deemed necessary, in a late case, (9 Vesey, *140 488.) that the wife should be served. Here *the right of redemption is exclusively in the wife, and her husband has absconded; she asks only for an opportunity to redeem, and I think it ought to be granted. If she had alleged any defence, I should have been also inclined to have granted her leave to put in a separate answer, but she admits the demand, and only asks for leave to redeem the mortgage.
The motion is granted, on her bringing into Court, in four weeks, the debt and interest, together with the costs accrued prior to the decretal order of sale.
Motion granted.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.