Robinson against Gosnold
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1794 |
| Date | 01 January 1794 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 87 E.R. 927
COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, CHANCERY, COMMON PLEAS, EXCHEQUER.
case 247. robinson against gosnold. A husband ia liable for necessaries furnished to his wife during her cohabitation with him; or if he turns her out of doors; or if he receive her back after separation ; but if she leave him, and live separate, and the person has notice of the separation, he is not liable.-S. C. 1 Salk. 119. S. C. Holt, 103. A husband discovering his wife to be a very lewd woman, goes away from her, and she, after having lived several years with an adulterer, was received into the plaintiff's house, who entertained her as the husband's wife. This action being an indebilatus assumpsit, was brought against the husband for lodging and dieting the wife. Holt, Chief Justice, at Nisi Prius, held, that let the woman be ever so vicious, yet, while she will cohabit with the husband, he is bound to provide necessaries for her, and is liable to the actions of such persons as furnish her with them, for his bargain was to take her for better for worse. In like manner it is if the husband turn his wife away for her wickednesa,he remains still chargeable for her necessaries. But if the wife leave her husband, they that trust her after it is notorious that she has left him do it at their peril, and shall not thereupon charge the husband (a). And he seemed to be of opinion, that if...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robinson v Greinold
...coram Holt C. J. At Nisi Prius at Guildhall. 13. robinson versus greinold. [Pas. 3 Ann. coram Holt C.J. At Nisi Prius at Guildhall.] S. C. 6 Mod. 171. Holt 103. 1 Keb. 69, &c. 1 Vent. 42. 2 Vent. 155. 1 Lev. 47. 1 Mod. 124, 129. Husband not liable for necessaries of the wife after elopement......
-
Haydon v Gould
...coram Holt C. J. At Nisi Prius at Guildhall. 13. robinson versus greinold. [Pas. 3 Ann. coram Holt C.J. At Nisi Prius at Guildhall.] S. C. 6 Mod. 171. Holt 103. 1 Keb. 69, &c. 1 Vent. 42. 2 Vent. 155. 1 Lev. 47. 1 Mod. 124, 129. Husband not liable for necessaries of the wife after elopement......
-
Bolton v Prentice
...9. 1 Sid. 425, S. C. Beaumont v. tVeldon, 2 Vent. 155, and that though she conduct herself unchastely, Robison v. Gosnold, 1 Salk. 119. 6 Mod. 171, S. C, or contract for them with an improper design of converting them to some other use, or of injuring the husband. But of this the tradesman ......
-
Clayton against Adams, Executor
...she was liable : but it (a)1 Vid. Morris v. Martin, 1 Stra. 647. (a)2 Co. Lit. 32 a. (6)1 Sed. vid. BoUnson v. Greinold, Salk. 119; and 6 Mod. 171. Vide Cox v. Kitchen, 1 Bos. & Pull. 338, [and ib. 226]. (of Ante, 4 vol. 766. (6)2 Ante, 5 vol. 679. (a)1 2 P. Wms. 144. (6)3 1 Bro. Ch, Cas. 1......