Langbein v. Schneider

27 Abb. N. Cas. 228
United States District Court·Decided April 15, 1891·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

McKean, J.

This is rather a novel case and there are evidently no reported cases in this State on the point involved. I have read over the evidence, together with the briefs and points of both counsel, very carefully. The law is no doubt well settled that a wife has an implied urgency to bind her husband for her necessaries, when he fails to supply them. The English cases cited uphold plaintiffs’ contention, and the two Georgia cases are strongly in their favor. I cannot well disregard them and feel justified in following them.

Under the evidence in this case I think the plaintiffs are entitled to judgment.

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

Langbein v. Schneider, 27 Abb. N. Cas. 228 (usdistct 1891).

27 Abb. N. Cas. 228 (Langbein v. Schneider) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cardozo v. Gulack
30 A.D.2d 42 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1968)
Arnold v. Brill
139 Misc. 846 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1931)
Browne v. West
143 A.D. 966 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1911)
In re the Estate of Brown
6 Mills Surr. 486 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1908)
Kellogg v. Stoddard
40 Misc. 92 (New York Supreme Court, 1903)