Ott v. Hentall
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit. Facts found by the court. The defendant so treated his wife as seriously to injure her health, in consequence of which she left him. After this, the plaintiffs furnished her, at her request, medical attendance, nursing, and board, she pledging the defendant’s credit for the same. Hutson made a bill against the wife, but was told by her that the defendant was obliged to pay it. The services, etc., were necessary for her recovery, and were adapted to her condition.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. Facts found by the court. The defendant so treated his wife as seriously to injure her health, in consequence of which she left him. After this, the plaintiffs furnished her, at her request, medical attendance, nursing, and board, she pledging the defendant’s credit for the same. Hutson made a bill against the wife, but was told by her that the defendant was obliged to pay it. The services, etc., were necessary for her recovery, and were adapted to her condition. Each of the plaintiffs knew that she was living apart from her husband. She had $700 or $800 on deposit in a savings…
1Opinion of the CourtChase, J.
“ Marital rights and duties are established by law.” Among them is the obligation of the husband to suitably mamtain his wife, according to his circumstances in life. He cannot relieve himself of the duty by his own misconduct. If he compels his wife to leave him, and does not make suitable provision for her support, she carries with her authority to obtain upon his credit necessaries of life, adapted to her condition and his circumstances. Rumney v. Keyes, 7 N. H. 571; Pidgin v. Cram, 8 N. H. 350; Allen v. Aldrich, 29 N. H. 63; Walker v. Laighton, 31 N. H. 111; Tebbets v. Hapgood, 34 N. H.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bergh v. WarnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Cunningham v. ReardonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Raynes v. BennettMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- Alley v. WinnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- Staples's Appeal from ProbateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1884
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Maschauer v. DownsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- Sharpe Furniture, Inc. v. BuckstaffWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Hoge v. Lava Cap Gold Mining Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1942
- Cheshire Medical Center v. HolbrookSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1995
- Southern New Hampshire Medical Center v. HayesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2010
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.