Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 451
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 451.290 (2026)

Wife deemed femme sole, when

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  451.290.  Wife deemed femme sole, when. — A married woman shall be deemed a femme sole so far as to enable her to carry on and transact business on her own account, to contract and be contracted with, to sue and be sued, and to enforce and have enforced against her property such judgments as may be rendered for or against her, and may sue and be sued at law or in equity, with or without her husband being joined as a party; provided, a married woman may invoke all exemption and homestead laws now or hereafter in force for the protection of personal and real property owned by the head of a family, except in cases where the husband has claimed such exemption and homestead rights for the protection of his own property.

­­--------

(RSMo 1939 § 3385)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 2998; 1919 § 7323; 1909 § 8304

CROSS REFERENCE:

Estate of wife conveyed and dower relinquished, how, covenant, when binding on wife or husband,  442.030

(1955) Wife held entitled to sue husband under § 451.250 for premarital personal tort committed by him in automobile accident. Hamilton v. Fulkerson (Mo.), 285 S.W.2d 642.

(1957) Wife may sue her husband who abandoned her without her fault to recover value of her necessities which she provided herself and may also sue him for conversion of her personal property. Smith v. Smith (A.), 300 S.W.2d 275.

(1957) Wife held entitled to sue administrator of deceased husband for personal injuries resulting from negligence of husband during coverture. Ennis v. Truhitte (Mo.), 306 S.W.2d 549.

(1959) One spouse cannot maintain civil action for damages against the other for personal injuries resulting from negligent acts committed during the marriage. Browner v. Browner (Mo.), 327 S.W.2d 808. Deatheridge v. Deatheridge (Mo.), 328 S.W.2d 624.

(1960) Recovery allowed in action by minor child for personal injuries and by father for medical bills and loss of earnings of minor child resulting from alleged negligence of defendant's intestate, the child's mother, in operation of motor vehicle.  Doctrine of introfamily immunity from suit expired upon death of mother and wife and did not extend to decedent's estate, Brennecke v. Kilpatrick (Mo.), 336 S.W.2d 68.

(1963) Wife allowed to recover in action for damages for loss of consortium caused by defendant's negligent injury of her husband. Novak v. Kansas City Transit, Inc. (Mo.), 365 S.W.2d 539, overruling Bernhardt v. Perry, 276 (Mo.), 612, 208 S.W. 462.

(1972) After divorce, a former wife may not recover damages from her former husband for a wrongful act committed during marriage. Ebel v. Ferguson (Mo.), 478 S.W.2d 334.

(1986) The court abolished the doctrine of interspousal immunity as a bar to claims for intentional torts. Townsend v. Townsend (Mo.), 708 S.W.2d 646.

(1986) The doctrine of spousal immunity is no longer available as a bar to negligence actions. S.A.V. v. K.G.V. (Mo.), 708 S.W.2d 651.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1954–1986 · leading case: Brawner v. Brawner, 327 S.W.2d 808 (Mo. 1959).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Brawner v. Brawner, 327 S.W.2d 808 (Mo. 1959). · cites it 68× “The provision of the Missouri married women's act with which we are primarily concerned, now designated as section 451.290 (all statutory references are to RSMo 1949, V.”
Townsend v. Townsend, 708 S.W.2d 646 (Mo. 1986). · cites it 10× “Section 451.290, RSMo 1978. "The broad and all inclusive language of the statute is not limited in any respect, and does not directly or by inference provide that she may be sued by everyone except her husband.”
Hamilton v. Fulkerson, 285 S.W.2d 642 (Mo. 1955). · cites it 7× “Section 8304 of 1909, construed in Rogers and Willott (the same as 2998 of 1929), is now, without pertinent change, Section 451.290, RSMo 1949,-V.A.M.S.: “A.”
Smith v. Smith, 300 S.W.2d 275 (Mo. Ct. App. 1957). · cites it 3× “1899, § 4335 [Section 451.290 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S.]), and as to her right to sue concerning it (Id.”
Hahn v. Hahn, 297 S.W.2d 559 (Mo. 1957). · cites it 3× “We will assume, as appellant contends, that she, as a married woman, could, by virtue of Section 451.290 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S., contract as freely as a femme *566 sole, not only with third persons but with her husband.”
Songer v. Brittain, 272 S.W.2d 16 (Mo. Ct. App. 1954). · cites it 3× “P-1, is that it permitted a verdict for plaintiff “in the absence of any ■* * *21 •contract between plaintiff and defendant .and without any agreed amount that should be paid.”
Hathman v. Waters, 586 S.W.2d 376 (Mo. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “250 has been eliminated by Section 451.290, the *382 forerunner of which was first enacted in 1889.”
Ferguson v. Stokes, 269 S.W.2d 655 (Mo. 1954). · cites it 3× “Britain could have taken title in her own name and then, under the statute [now Section 451.290 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S.] as construed in numerous decisions * * * lawfully could have conveyed to her husband without the intervention of a third .”
S.A.V. v. K.G.V., 708 S.W.2d 651 (Mo. 1986). · cites it 2× “is the proximate and direct cause of [p]laintiff’s contracting this disease, herpes, and thereby suffering injury and damage....” The trial court ruled that the action was barred by the doctrine of interspousal immunity and the Court of Appeals-Eastern District transferred the…”
Tryon v. Casey, 416 S.W.2d 252 (Mo. Ct. App. 1967). · cites it 2× “Under that testimony we held that the injured wife did not intend that the income from her sewing go to her separate or individual use but that “she did it (the sewing) as an aid and service to the husband in the support of the family”, and that consequently the loss of such…”
Croker v. Consol. Serv. Car Co., 365 S.W.2d 524 (Mo. 1963). · cites it 3× “Section 451.290 RSMo 1959, V.A. M.S.; Skillman v.”
In re Sartain, 61 B.R. 1007 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1986). · cites it 4× “The statute is sexually, maritally and anatomically neutral. It gives no preference to either spouse nor is it restricted in any way by any prohibited classification.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.