Bartley v. Connell

196 A.D. 979

This text of 196 A.D. 979 (Bartley v. Connell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bartley v. Connell, 196 A.D. 979 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1921).

Opinion

Judgment and order of the County Court of Kings county reversed and a. new trial ordered, costs to abide the event. The proof showed no employment of plaintiff by the testatrix. The services having been rendered during the lifetime of the testatrix’s husband, in the absence of proof to the contrary, it must be assumed that the services were rendered at the instance and request of testatrix’s husband, and that he was liable therefor. (May v. Josias, 159 N. Y. Supp. 820.) The services in question as housekeeper, nurse, etc., [980]*980would come under the head of necessaries, and, although furnished to the wife, the husband is responsible. (Valois v. Gardner, 122 App. Div. 245; Thrall Hospital v. Caren, 140 id. 171.) The testimony of plaintiff was improperly admitted, as plaintiff was incompetent to testify to personal transactions between herself and testatrix. (Code Civ. Proc. § 829.) Blaekmar, P. J., Mills, Rich, Putnam and Jaycox, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Valois v. Gardner
122 A.D. 245 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1907)
May v. Josias
159 N.Y.S. 820 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1916)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
196 A.D. 979, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bartley-v-connell-nyappdiv-1921.