Paquin, Ltd. v. Westervelt
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action to recover a balance due for wearing apparel furnished to the defendant’s wife for her personal use, brought to and tried by the Superior Court in Fairfield County, Haines, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff for $863, and appeal by the defendant. Plaintiff is an English corporation located in London, England, and sues the defendant for wearing apparel and merchandise sold his wife, while she was temporarily in London.
Read the full summary
Action to recover a balance due for wearing apparel furnished to the defendant’s wife for her personal use, brought to and tried by the Superior Court in Fairfield County, Haines, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff for $863, and appeal by the defendant. Plaintiff is an English corporation located in London, England, and sues the defendant for wearing apparel and merchandise sold his wife, while she was temporarily in London. These purchases were charged to her account, were reasonable and necessary apparel for the wife, and, in that sense, were for the benefit and support…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The sales of merchandise for which recovery is sought were made in England to the wife of a resident of Connecticut while temporarily abroad, and were for her individual use. Husband and wife, during the period of these purchases, were living together as husband and wife in Connecticut. The action is brought upon the implied promise, which the statute (Revision of 1918, § 5275) raises from the beneficial use by the wife of the goods purchased. Buckingham v. Hurd, 52 Conn. 404, 406; Fitzmaurice v. Buck, 77 Conn. 390, 391, 59 Atl. 415.
The Married Women’s Act of 1877 included a provision…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Fitzmaurice v. BuckSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1904
- Buckingham v. HurdSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1884
- Dalton v. Knights of ColumbusSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1907
- Mettler v. SnowSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
- Bowditch v. AndrewMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1864
3Cited by8 opinions
- Valante v. ValanteSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Tuohey v. MartinjakSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- McGowen v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1977
- Howland Dry Goods Co. v. WelchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
- Santangelo v. SantangeloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.