Blum v. Ross

Citations

• 116 Pa. 163
• 10 A. 32
• 1887 Pa. LEXIS 377

Syllabus

<p>1. Goods iu a store, the first stock of which was purchased by au insolvent husband as the agent of his wife, the wife signing notes given therefor without participating in the bargain and taking no part in the business continued by the husband as her agent, cannot be held by the wife against the husband’s creditors, even though she have obtained the benefit of the act of April 8, 1872, P. L. 35.</p> <p>2. To enable a married woman to hold goods bought on credit, against the creditors of her husband, she must own a separate estate sufficient to serve as a basis of a credit and must affirmatively establish by direct evidence, or by evidence of circumstances surrounding the transaction sufficient to submit to a jury to infer the fact, that the goods were bought upon the credit of her separate estate.</p> <p>3. The facts appearing in this case, to wit: that the wife had a separate estate in a house and lot; that her husband was insolvent and her vendor, his sister-in-law, knew it and took the wife’s individual exemption notes with warrant of attorney to enter judgment, were not sufficient evidence to submit to the jury to find that the wife purchased the goods on the credit of her separate estate.</p>