HUSBAND AND WIFE 1993

An. Code, 1924, sec. 16. 1912, sec. 16. 1904, sec. 16. 1888, sec. 19. 1880, ch. 253.

1898, ch. 457, sec. 16.

16. Any married woman against whom any proceeding may be taken
under the two preceding sections shall have power to appoint an attorney
at law to act for her in such proceeding.

Where a husband without his wife's authority employs counsel for her, she is not
bound. Taylor v. Welslager, 90 Md. 416.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 17. 1912, sec. 17. 1904, sec. 17. 1888, sec. 14. 1898, ch. 457, sec. 17.

1867, ch. 223. 1900, ch. 135.

17. In all cases where leases for a definite term, or for a term of years,
renewable forever, have been or may hereafter be made to a married
woman, and the rent therein stipulated to be paid shall be in arrear and
unpaid, it shall be lawful for the landlord to levy said rent by distress
in the same manner as if the lessee were a feme sole; and in case of no
sufficient distress being found on said premises, to make such re-entry or
bring such action for recovery of the demised premises as he or she might
do if the lessee were feme sole and had covenanted for the payment of said
rents and to suffer such re-entry to be made.

Prior to the act of 1898, a married woman might be sued under this section without
the joinder of her husband. Cruzen v. McKaig, 57 Md. 458; Worthington v. Cooke,
52 Md. 309.

As to distress; see art. 53, sec. 9.

Cited in dissenting opinion in Tizer v. Tizer, 162 Md. 500.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 18. 1912, sec. 18. 1904, sec. 18. 1888, sec. 15. 1867, ch. 223.

1898, ch. 457, sec. 18.

18. In all deeds made to married women since March 19, 1867, of
real estate or chattels real, it shall be competent for the grantee or lessee
to bind herself and her assigns by any covenant running with or relating
to said real estate or chattels real, the same as if she were a feme sole.

The husband should not be joined in a suit against the wife under this section;
the remedy is at law. Worthington v. Cooke, 52 Md. 307.

This section held to have no application. Davis v. Carroll, 71 Md. 571.

Prior to this section, a married woman was not capable of binding herself by a
covenant. Armstrong v. Kerns, 61 Md. 366.

Cited but not construed in Cruzen v. McKaig, 57 Md. 462.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 19. 1912, sec. 19. 1904, sec. 19. 1888, sec. 13. 1798, ch. 101, sub-ch. 5,

sec. 8. 1898, ch. 457, sec. 19.

19. A husband bringing a personal action to recover in right of his
wife after her death may declare specifically setting forth in the usual
manner how the debt or right accrued to his wife, and stating further that
by marriage the debt or right devolved on him.

For a case apparently now inapplicable by reason of changes in the law, see Hubbard
v. Barcus, 38 Md. 181.

Cited but not construed in In re Lee's Estate, 76 Md. 111.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 20. 1912, sec. 20. 1904, sec. 20. 1900, ch. 633, sec. 19A.

20. A married woman may contract with her husband and may form
a copartnership with her husband or with any other person or persons
in the same manner as if she were a feme sole, and upon all such contracts,
partnership or otherwise, a married woman may sue and be sued as fully
as if she were a feme sole.

This section referred to in construing sec. 5—see notes thereto. Furstenburg v.
Furstenburg, 152 Md. 252; David v. David, 161 Md. 532.

Prayers in a suit to hold a married woman as a partner of her husband by estoppel,
held to be supported by Maryland cases and this section. West v. Driscoll, 142 Md. 210;
Furstenburg v. Furstenburg, 152 Md. 252.