Henley v. Wilson
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtTemple, J.
It was admitted on the trial that the husband was not present at the time of the assault, and had no knowledge of the occurrence until some time afterwards. An instruction was asked by appellant to the effect “that the husband is not responsible for the wrongful acts of the wife committed out of his presence and without his knowledge or consent.” This was refused, and a verdict for plaintiff was returned and judgment went against both defendants, from which the husband appeals. Whether this proposed instruction should have been given is the only question involved.
While there is a conflict in…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In re the Estate of BurdickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Van Maren v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- McFadden v. Santa Ana, Orange, & Tustin Street RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Zeliff v. JenningsTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- Kowing v. . ManlyNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hageman v. VanderdoesArizona Supreme Court · 1914
- Kellar v. JamesWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1907
- Curtis v. AshworthSupreme Court of Georgia · 1928
- Schuler v. HenrySupreme Court of Colorado · 1908
- Graham v. TuckerSupreme Court of Florida · 1908
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.