Legal Opinion

Zipser v. Hardy

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 20, 1945PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtBernard Botein, J.

When married parties are living together, there is an implied authority in the wife, stemming from that marital relation, to order and receive necessaries at the husband’s expense. If, as claimed by the defendant, they are living apart as a result of the wife’s affirmative wrongdoing, a triable issue is raised as to whether the alleged destruction of that aspect of the marital status gave rise to the necessity of invoking the legal services which form the basis of this action. (See Pearson v. Pearson, 230 N. Y. 141; Damman v. Bancroft, 43 Misc. 678.) A wife may not charge her husband, under…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pearson v. . PearsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
  2. Damman v. BancroftAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1904
  3. In re the Estate of OppenheimNew York Surrogate's Court · 1942

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Levine v. RaymondAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1956

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API