Legal Opinion
Schreiner v. Fruit
Alaska Supreme Court
Decided February 25, 1974No. 1949PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Before RABINO WITZ, C. J., and. CON-NOR, BOOCHEVER, and FITZGERALD, JJ. RABINOWITZ, Chief Justice.
The principal issue we are called upon to decide in this appeal is whether a wife has an independent right to sue for loss of consortium due to negligently inflicted injury to her husband.
Katherine Schreiner’s husband sustained serious injuries rendering him permanently and totally disabled as a result of the negligence of Appellee Clay Fruit, an employee of Appellee Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States. As a result of the accident, Mr. Schreiner filed suit against Fruit…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Chevron Oil Co. v. HusonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Great Northern Railway Co. v. Sunburst Oil & Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Dini v. NaiditchIllinois Supreme Court · 1960
- Hitaffer v. Argonne Co., IncCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
- Millington v. Southeastern Elevator Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1968
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Rodriguez v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.California Supreme Court · 1974
- American Export Lines, Inc. v. AlvezSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Whittlesey v. MillerTexas Supreme Court · 1978
- Moore v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1976
- Hopson v. St. Mary's HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.