Maxwell v. Lowther
This text of 13 N.Y.S. 169 (Maxwell v. Lowther) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
It has been held that the wife’s express agreement to pay her husband wages for his services in aid of her separate business could, be enr forced, (Kingman v. Frank, 33 Hun, 471;) but that, in the absence of an express agreement, it could not be, (Lynn v. Smith, 35 Hun, 275.) We have no doubt of the correctness of the latter decision. Whatever power the legisr lature may have conferred upon the wife to make contracts with her husband, (see Hendricks v. Isaacs, 117 N. Y. 411, 22 N. E. Rep. 1029;. Suan v. Caffe, N. Y., 25 N. E. Rep. 488,) it has not required her to requite in cash, for the benefit of her husband’s creditors, the services which her husband has voluntarily rendered her in aid of her separate estate or business, solely upon considerations springing out of the marriage relation. Between members of the same family the law will not imply a promise to pay for services rendered. Williams v. Hutchinson, 3 N. Y. 312. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
All concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
13 N.Y.S. 169, 35 N.Y. St. Rep. 767, 59 Hun 617, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1013, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maxwell-v-lowther-nysupct-1891.