Baker v. Carter
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On motion. ' Tbe defendant moved for a new trial after a verdict was rendered against him in the Superior Court, for Kennebec County, in an action to recover for groceries furnished by the plaintiff, and, as appeared by the testimony, were ordered by his wife and consumed in his family.
Read the full summary
On motion. ' Tbe defendant moved for a new trial after a verdict was rendered against him in the Superior Court, for Kennebec County, in an action to recover for groceries furnished by the plaintiff, and, as appeared by the testimony, were ordered by his wife and consumed in his family. It was admitted that the account was originally opened with the wife previous to her marriage, under the name of Fowler, ■and that it was continued subsequent to her marriage with the plaintiff, in her married name. There was also evidence, on the part of the defendant, that he never authorized his wife to…
1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.
During cohabitation a wife has ordinarily a prima facie agency to purchase on her husband’s credit such supplies as are necessary for herself and family. This rule of law is based largely on the fact that it is customary to intrust a wife with the management of the household. While living together the law presumes the husband’s assent to contracts made by the wife for necessaries. This agency, however, is limited to articles that are reasonably necessary for her or the family, and does not extend to business contracts, nor to purchases beyond what may be regarded as suitable to their…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Noel v. O'NeillCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1916
- James McCreery & Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1913
- Watts v. MoffettIndiana Court of Appeals · 1895
- Landgrof v. TannerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
- Saks v. HuddlestonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.