Kirchberg v. Feenstra

After Joan Feenstra (defendant) filed a criminal complaint against her husband Harold for allegedly molesting their daughter, Harold, while incarcerated, retained attorney Karl Kirchberg (plaintiff) and signed a $3,000 promissory note secured by a mortgage on the home jointly owned by Harold and Joan, executed unilaterally under Louisiana's "head-and-master" rule allowing a husband to manage jointly held property without his wife's knowledge or consent. Joan was unaware of the mortgage, and after the couple separated and Harold defaulted on the note, Kirchberg obtained a sheriff's order to seize and sell the home; Kirchberg sued for a declaratory judgment that he need not disclose the mortgage to Joan, and Joan counterclaimed that the head-and-master statute was unconstitutional, with the district court granting summary judgment for the defendants before the court of appeals reversed and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.