Legal Opinion

Bickerton v. Tanney

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 20, 1950No. Appeal, No. 61PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Ross, J.,

In this action of assumpsit, plaintiffs sued the defendant (husband) for necessaries furnished to his wife and infant daughter. The defendant and his wife were married on July 11, 1947 and separated on Sep*220tember 4 following. A few days later, the wife went to live with the plaintiffs and continued to do so during the present litigation. At the time of the separation the wife was pregnant and on January 19, 1948 gave birth to a child in Magee Hospital in Pittsburgh. The plaintiffs furnished the wife with food and shelter, paid the hospital bill for her confinement and the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Holt v. PariserSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  2. Monahan v. AumanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
  3. Breinig v. MeitzlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1854
  4. Hultz v. GibbsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth ex rel. Gutzeit v. GutzeitSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. Gimbel Bros. v. PintoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  3. First Pennsylvania Banking & Trust Co. v. Crozer, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Chester County1971

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API