Legal Opinion
Heinzelman v. Union News Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided April 13, 1950PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Per curiam
A husband’s action for loss of his wife’s services and for medical expenses incurred by reason of her injuries is, under New Jersey law, based upon a violation of his property rights and is not governed by New Jersey’s two-year Statute of Limitations (N. J. Stat. Ann., § 2:24-2) covering “ actions for injuries to the person ”. (See Fryer v. Mount Holly Water Co., 87 N. J. L. 57.) Accordingly, the husband’s action for loss of services was timely brought (N. J. Stat. Ann., § 2:24-1; Civ. Prac. Act, § 49, subd. 6; § 13). Since defendant’s motion “ for judgment dismissing the complaint ” under…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Advance Music Corp. v. American Tobacco Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1946
- Imperatrice v. ImperatriceNew York Court of Appeals · 1948
- Eidlitz v. Fischbach & Moore, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
- Demuth v. GriffinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1938
- Heaman v. E. N. Rowell Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1931
3Cited by1 opinion
- Cunningham v. Allied Chemical & Dye Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1956